Its funny reading these comments that wish for eternal suffering on this guy for a mere difference of belief in the 21st century. Completely proves his point.
Daniel Chen Does Christianity tell you to call somebody an intellectually dishonest hack then wish that they became one by suddenly discarding the beliefs of a lifetime in the hopes of getting into heaven?
Larry Labonte But you find it perfectly reasonable that if one is not willing to believe the unbelievable that he be condemned to suffer for eternity. Seems just a little harsh doncha think?
Mark Twain on the Bible : "It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies."
Not quite. Twain called himself a freethinker, and was often jesting when calling himself a Christian, and / or speaking in a cultural sense rather than in a faith sense. However, this quote is from Twain's character, Satan, not from Twain himself. The difference is worth noting. Twain seems to have been very ambiguous about the bible, even while he was confident of the frequent, deep hypocrisy of the church and the worse hypocrisy of allegedly-christian society. It's interesting to note that the character speaking of the bible as being full of lies is in fact a biblical character. And the observations that Satan makes in the book are observations not of any lies in scripture but in how people treated each other in the name of Christ's church. If you're going to quote Twain's characters as if they were Twain, you would have to consider quoting as his thought the thought of other characters of Twain's who at least nominally believed in God in some way, like Eve, or Methusaleh, or Eve's children. Even for casual usage, the quoting of an author's character as if it were the author speaking seems questionable to me. It would've been good if you'd included the character and the source.
@@rakoczi29 Who is we? It's you alone and your insolence here, idiot. If you ask a question then wait for an answer. And speaking of answer, go study jewish names, it's not my duty to fill the gaps in your education.
I love that! It is so true. I have religious in laws. I could tell you stories that are unbelievable. They are mentally ill. Worst of the worst. They also have a hard time hearing truth with evidence. Christians believe they are the first religion. Like 8th or 9th. Crazy.
William Bill Fish, exactly. Absolutely ruddy brilliant. People fight and argue over book's they never wrote. What was the first religion? Because nobody owns one.
I like that quote, I’m an atheist, have been since I knew what the word meant. My parents were not church attenders they offered me the chance to go to church, I did. I knew immediately I thought it was fantasy. It’s how I got my RE O level, treated it as a fairy tale. I told my RE teacher he said that’s a good way for an atheist like me to treat the bible. There’s morality I believe in but, that’s highly personal. Science is more important.
Enigma 68, Thank you for your response. So many believers assume Atheists know nothing of these religious texts. When more likely than not it is the understanding of these texts that have led us to Atheism.
Probably had to ask if he could please go back and reveal the truth to many that paid him to hear misinformation and lies. But if they/we don't believe the indisputable evidence set before them/us why would they believe him?
If you can read the Bible and still think God is good don't sit on a jury, *PLEASE* As for the Christians in the comments saying Christopher is burning in Hell just remember, you're telling us more about you that you're telling us about Christopher.
"Our God is a loving and forgiving god" "Jesus loves you" "Christopher Hitchens is burning in hell" Common christian ideology. Tell me how does one believe God is loving and forgiving yet also believe that Christopher Hitchens is burning in hell? The man was a good man. He believed in goodness and morales in man without the NEED for divinity. He hated the wretched and cruel things that man does in the name of religion. The cruel things depicted in the various "holy books". He argued that man doesn't NEED religion to be good. These things don't make him profoundly immoral and malevolent aka evil. But it wouldn't just be Christopher Hitchens either. It would be everyone who has heard the word of your particular version of God but not given their life to him. BILLIONS of people with different beliefs than yourself. All damned to hell because YOUR religion got it right. If by the odd chance you do turn out right, then your god is an evil and cruel dictator. A disgusting excuse for an all powerful being. A vain and self centered deity that I would be appalled to claim. If you're not Christian, I am certain you are a believer in one of the other major religions based on your comment. Thus my statement still stands. Color me burning too.
"The man was a good man. He believed in goodness and morales in man without the NEED for divinity." That's a good one, a good man and yet he denies his creator. Tell your mom and dad you don't know them; see how they react.
Knock knock "Who is it?" "It's me, Jesus. Let me in." "Why do you want in?" "I want to save you." "Save me from what?" "From what I'll do to you if you don't let me in?"
the desiples said to Jesus ,,"WE BELIEVE IN YOU"and Jesus said"YOU BELIEVE IN ME BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEEN WHAT I HAVE DONE,BUT BLESSIT WHO BELIEVES IN ME WITHOUT SEEING".so his followers did not have faith,,,Faith is what Jesus wants from us for salvation,,,Nobody can go to Heaven with sin,,so Jesus didn't to punishment for our sins for us that believe in him,,,eventhough nobody is in Heaven or Hell yet,,,,people that believe in Jesus have constant communication with him,because Jesus is in our life,,so a believer cannot deny someone who they know
I have a fairly wide vocabulary and I can articulate myself but when Hitchens spoke he did it with more eloquence and cutting ferocity than I could ever hope to achieve. To this day I still feel somewhat sorry for all the poor bastards that tried to debate him on the topic of religion. It must have been such a humbling experience for them. And well-deserved in most cases.
Hitchens may be the greatest orator of modern times. Unshakably true, an elegant balance of purposeful emotion, inescapable logic, and simply a wonderful mind.
key trait of the unintelligent is to confuse vocabulary for intelligence, when some of the smartest rarely speak, much less publicly and about religion of all things. Could just shoot ones self instead.
Well, if Matt Dillahunty can get an ounce or two more arrogant, and learn to moderate his "shut the fuck up!" moments, I think he has a chance to earn his place at the table...LO>E his logic...
Hitchens was the absolute example of knowledge over BS! This man could debate any typical "christian" and school them on their own lack of real truth and knowledge of their own "faith"!
Faith is what you say to your druggy son. "I have faith that you can change," knowing the recidivism rate even if he does, and knowing he probably won't. It's really hope.
The Jesus myth, if handled from the point of view of making money, can be very enriching. Just look at the Vatican and how it has made it's fortune peddling the life of a man who said to not lay up treasures on earth. Priceless!
I am a Catholic and i do agree the vatican hasdone corrupt things with their own self interests that contradict the bible. However you need to understand that we are all born with sin and continue to sin. This does not mean that the religion is corrupt itself. Its the people who do bad things that are the evildoers, not the actual church or religion. We all were born with choices and paths that decide to take. Its up to humans to do the right thing.
how the fuck can a baby be born with sin? it is born without religion, and pretty much everything else. Stop forcing your bullshit onto infants, its child abuse.
Well most of them are true. So does the lilith part of being adam 1st wife. Its not in the mass produced bible that every Christian home. I found out about lilith in the big bible in the library, which im amazed myself for reading that big one. 😂😂😂
Joseph and Jesus 1. Joseph was a shepherd (37:2); Jesus is the Great Shepherd (John 10). 2. Joseph was opposed to and exposed evil (37:2); Jesus did the same. 3. Joseph was loved by the his father (37:3-4); Jesus was beloved by the Father.(Mat. 3:17; 17:5; John 10:17; Philippians 2:9) 4. Joseph was hated by his brothers (37:4); Jesus was hated by His brothers (John 1:11; Luke 19:14). 5. Joseph was hated for his words (37:8); Jesus was hated for His words of truth. (John 7:7; 3:32) 6. Joseph was promised a remarkable future (37:7-12); Jesus looked passed the cross to the joy set before Him (Isaiah 9:6, 7; Luke 1:31-33; Hebrews 12:2). 7. Joseph foretold of his future sovereignty (37:7-12); Jesus did the same. (Mat. 26:64) 8. Joseph was envied by his brothers (37:11); Jesus was envied by His. (Mat. 27:17-18) 9. Joseph was sent by his father to his brothers (37:13); Jesus was sent to the ‘lost sheep of Israel,’ by His father (John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40; 12:48-50; 17:21) 10. Joseph seeks out his brothers (37:14-17); Jesus sought out His (Luke 19:10) 11. Joseph seeks the welfare of his brothers (37:14); Jesus came not to condemn but that the world might be saved through Him. (John 3:17) 12. Joseph seeks his brothers until he finds them; Jesus seeks us until He finds us. And this at the initiative of the f(F)ather. 13. Joseph was conspired against (37:18); Jesus was also conspired against. (Mat. 12:14) 14. Joseph’s brothers did not believe his dreams (37:19, 29); Jesus’ brethren did not believe His words. (Mat. 27:39-43; John 3:18, 36) 15. Joseph was stripped of his coat (37:23); Jesus was stripped of His coat. (Mat. 27:27, 28; John 19:23) 16. Joseph was cast into a pit (37:24); Jesus was thrown into a grave. 17. Joseph was taken out of the pit, alive in his body (37:28); Jesus was bodily-resurrected from the tomb (pit). 18. Joseph’s brothers mingled hypocrisy with their hatred (37:27); the Jews did the same with Jesus (Mat. 27:35, 36; John 18:28, 31) 19. Joseph is sold for the price of a slave(37:38); Jesus was sold for thirty pieces of silver (the price of a slave). 20. Judah suggested the idea of selling his brother (37:26-28); the Greek name for Judah is Judas (Mat. 1:2-3). 21. Joseph’s blood sprinkled coat (goat blood) is presented to his father (37:31); Jesus is our scapegoat and His blood was presented to the Father as a sin offering. (Leviticus 16:8-10) Chapter 39 22. Joseph becomes a servant (39:1); Jesus became a servant (Philippians 2:6, 7) 23. Joseph was a prosperous servant (39:2, 3); Jesus was also a prosperous Servant (Isaiah 52:13; 53:10) 24. Joseph’s master was well pleased with him (39:4); the Father was always pleased with what Jesus did (John 8:29). 25. Joseph, the servant, was made a blessing to others (39:5); Jesus was a blessing to the world. 26. Joseph was a goodly person (39:6); Jesus came as a servant into the world and yet lived a goodly (perfect) life. 27. Joseph was sorely tempted and did not sin(39:7-12); Jesus was tempted and did not sin (Mat. 4:1-11; Heb. 2:18; 4:15) 28. Joseph was falsely accused (39:16-18); Jesus was falsely accused (Mat. 16:59, 60). 29. Joseph attempted no defense (39:19); Jesus gave no defense at His trials (Isaiah 53:7). 30. Joseph was cast into prison, though he was innocent(39:20); Jesus is sentenced to death though Pilate found no fault in Him (John 19:4, 6). 31. Joseph thus suffered at the hands of the Gentiles (first by his brethren then by the Gentiles; Jesus was sold by His brethren then suffered at the hands of the Romans (Gentiles. 32. Joseph, the innocent one, suffered severely (Psalm 105:17, 18); Jesus suffered by crucifixion. 33. Joseph won the respect of his jailor (39:21); Jesus won the respect of a Roman centurion standing at the cross (Luke 23:47). Chapter 40 34. Joseph was numbered with transgressors (40:1-3); as it was prophesied about Jesus (Isaiah 53:12) and as it was (Mark 15:28). 35. Joseph was the means of blessing to one, but the pronouncer of judgment on the other (40:16, 17, 19); as Jesus was a blessing to one of the thieves He was crucified between (Luke 23:43). 36. Joseph evidenced his knowledge of the future and gave credit to God alone (40:8); as Jesus did the same on earth (John 12:49). 37. Joseph desired to be remembered by the butler (40:14); as Jesus said, “This do in remembrance of Me.” (Luke 22:19) Chapter 41 38. Joseph was put in prison (the tomb) but God would not allow him to remain there because God’s purpose for Joseph was not yet fulfilled. So it was with Jesus Christ, God would not allow Him to remain in the tomb (Acts 2:24). Joseph changed his prison clothes for clothes of glory as did Jesus Christ (John 20:6, 7). 39. Joseph was delivered from prison by the hand of God (God sending a dream to Pharaoh and Joseph’s testimony in 45:7-9); as God raised Jesus from the tomb (Acts 2:32; 10:40). 40. Joseph is seen now as the Revealer of secrets; compare 41:16 with the words of Jesus in John 17:8; 8:28; and 12:49.
@Jazzkeyboardist1 I don't think your arguments against Mr Hitchins' intellectual ideas are particularly enhanced by resorting to personal gossip about his family, or by the repeated use of a diminutive nickname for him. You may find some sort of malicious satisfaction in this sort of thing, but why not maintain some dignity and just stick to addressing the issues in contention?
+Bob Lawblawblaw: no, not at all. For, you see: not all can converse intelligently. So, when I come across one such as thee, I simply must let him be his uncouth personality. Thus it is written; thus let it be!
Brilliant. Christopher Hitchens was a true genius whose unceasing efforts to liberate humanity from the stupidity and evil of man-made religion and whose immortal words of wisdom and enlightenment will live on for ever.
me too. i quit smoking 2 years ago; and i wish i could go back in time and cure him of his addiction that delivered his fatal illness. he was a very inspirational and clever man.
SuttonSantiniPaulo As i was gunna write u before i wrote what i did was: No matter what, no evidence will be good enough when youre busted out. You have no answer because you cant answer it jackass. Its COMMON KNOWLEDGE AND ACTUAL PROOF. Now continue to argue about something you dont believe in and make scenarios about a God if there wasn't one if God existed you confused little boy. lol
This man's domination of this subject is what impresses me. The way he brings common sense, reason and knowledge to bear on biblical nonsense, inspires me to know more.
Well read his books then. Like this speech, I found the book of his I read ('God is not Great') a mixture of strong intellect, persuasive rhetoric and slightly-skewed-to-fit information/facts about religion, ie a fair bit of straw-man creation/destruction in order to make his points. I was almost, but not quite, persuaded into atheism by him and Dawkins at one point.
Why is it christians are so willing to believe biblical text, god on faith? Is it a form of contagion? That kind of blind faith, lacking evidence, weakens them to skepticism or questioning on other aspect of life, such as history, science, business. When you’re completely invested in religion, with its dogma, as a blind faith subscriber, you’ve been robbed of becoming self-reliant, intellectually resolved, and most importantly, that of becoming advanced human beings-free of religion, its childish superstition and fallacious narrative. “Secularism is the only guarantee of religious freedom.” Thank you very much Christopher.
***** Oho, it is a false conflict, just get your data straight and try quitting your manipulating ways for a while. The "underlying reason" you care so much abour is pure BS. And does really religion teach believing without evidence? Is it sufficient to say that God does not exist just because Abraham and Moses failed to take a picture of Him? And where exactly in the Bible does it say that the Sun revolves around the Earth?
***** Geocentrism has no grounds in the Bible, therefore if we regard Galileo's persecution from a more lucid point of view, we could observe that his conflict with the Catholic Church wasn't even carried on religious grounds. Catholic priests were also scientists and Galileo's heliocentrism attacked their geocentrical theories, and by that their reputations as scholars. It can all be reduced to "the scholar supported by a greater power is the greater scholar". And that's what they did: they used the power of the Holy Office to make sure their competitor is reduced to silence. Total assholes, of course, but the whole thing, although it might look like a battle on religious grounds, was a mere competition for authority in scholarship using the dirtiest of methods. But that's what you don't recall. Just like you seem to be mute when I ask you about the biblical support for geocentrism. And the rest is typical radical rationalist bla-bla.
If the verse you quote was used as grounds for geocentrism, it's most surely a misinterpretation or an error of translation. Not a regular error but a very uninspired choice of words that may lead to misinterpretation. First of all, think about it: did king David, the author of the psalms have any notion of a round (ellipsoidal, geoidal) Earth that would revolve around itself and around anything? No. You must make a link between what the Bible says and the level of knowledge at the time it was written. Because, although it's said to be inspired by God, it was written by humans for the understanding of humans. Because when I read that verse in my native language (which is so rich in synonims, each with its specific tone of sense that is less susceptible of ambiguity) the word "world" suggests much more than the Earth alone, but the whole Creation, that does not move not because it's imobile in any way, but unwavering. A more inspired translation would have been this: "Surely the world is established so that it cannot be shattered."....or something like that, anything like it that doesn't ambiguously point at immobility. Because, let's not forget what the Psalms are: poems and hymns dedicated to God. They have a particular place in the Bible since they aren't prophecies or revelations. About the radicals who deny scientific discoveries: I absolutely disagree with them. But, regarding evolution alone, there is a whole bunch of controversy about it among scientists themselves. Therefore, the other radical orientation, that is to glorify evolutionism as absolute truth, is wrong as well, because it is only a theory so far. Yes, religion promotes strong faith, but of course, since the vast majority of people are mere simpletons, they make the huge mistake of understanding the verses of the Bible purely literally. Then again, in terms of faith, that wouldn't even matter since God is transcedental. What is a life of 70-80 years believing the world is flat compared to an eternity in Heaven? God's mathematics are esentially different than ours. But I don't expect you would take my word on that. Anyways, returning to Galilei, you need to know that it is very easy for me to point a finger at the malicious priests, since I am from the Orthodox Church and, hey!, we didn't have any form of Inquisition :P Plus, leaving all sorts of political corectness apart, we still sometimes call it "the catholic heresy". However, relax, we wouldn't burn any at the stake, but rather hope they would see the error of their ways themselves. Otherwise, what's the point?
***** Oh ,yes, there pretty much is. Not in terms of "is it" but in terms of "how". I know the meaning of "scientific theory", maybe better than you think.
I am ashamed to say I find myself avoiding watching Hitchens videos, because it such a tragedy he is gone. If I binge on his videos then I just become sad we will never hear from him again.
Continue binging his videos, with the understanding that he lives on in his impact on the world, and in his impact on you as well. He had a superb mind, it would be a shame for people to avoid his discussions.
And then some Christian get triggered. Just hold on tight that bible of yours. Everything in the bible is the truth. The earth is 6 to 7 thousands old. God make adam and eve, jesus walk on water, and we all born with mortal sin just for being a mortal.
No one can change the mind of a believer. On the other hand, the mind of those who do not believe can be easily changed. How about God giving a press conference.
JIm Rodgers Quote you: No one can change the mind of a believer. On the other hand, the mind of those who do not believe can be easily changed. How about God giving a press conference. Stuart Close Quote: For those who believe no proof is necessary, for those who do not believe no proof is possible. If you want to hear God or one of many Gods give a press conference (of Bs)you listen to the Pope or Trump or Putin Duterte etc. But, if you want to listen to a press conference given by the one true Creative Mistress of all of the Physics (Natural laws) and all things of the ever-evolving Universe, and all of the evolutions of life and being; get up early and go out and find a peaceful place and wait for the Dawn Chorus to begin. And there are no "words of man" written in any holy or unholy book, that lift your spirit as high or compare. www.fromthecorcletothesphere.net
@Chaotic Good Wait, what? You don't believe in aliens as in you don't believe people who've allegedly seen aliens on Earth, or you don't believe that extraterestrial beings exist somewhere in this universe, or in the multiverse?!?
I choose to be agnostic because every religious dogma, every one is absolutely, positively, most certain that their dogma is the only true way to Heaven., Who's right? It depends solely on where you were raised and who raised you.
+Wendell Goode, I know what you say sounds right; but it's not really true. For example, Paul's teaches in his Epistle to the Romans that those who do not know God through revelation can nonetheless discover Him through the things of creation. Similarly, in the Acts of the Apostles, as he is exploring the pantheon of gods in Athens and comes across a memorial "to the unknown God", he uses that memorial to speak about the God of Revelation. Picking up from that, the Catholic Church -- in contrast to many Protestant denominations -- teaches [read the Second Vatican Council's teaching on non-Christian religions] that non-Christians religions have a participation in the truth. It further teaches that adherents of those religions who strive to abide by their tenets and otherwise live in accordance with their conscience can be saved. BUT: there is one proviso. Their salvation comes through Jesus Christ! Even though they don't realize it!
+joseph thomas i am so sick of fucking dipshits who quote the goddamn bible... LISTEN CLOSELY: WE DON'T FUCKING BELIEVE IN THE FUCKING BIBLE! DONT QUOTE IT BECAUSE WE. DONT. CARE! sorry. .. just had to get that of my chest.
Hi, Tom: I understand your sentiments and I myself do not at all appreciate facile quotings from Scripture. I'm sure you understand that I am responding to someone choosing to dialog about faith and belief.
+Tom Watson I feel the same way Tom, except the books you all learned from in school have been rewritten many times over to reflect the theories of man and what they believe is the current trending bias truth. My book hasn't changed (unless you believe the bias people mentioned above) in 2000 years. The message is perfectly clear, even after 2000 years! How many times did your religion change?
Any damning to hell is Hate speech and bullying. Please make sure you report any to TH-cam Just hit the 3 dots next to the message and you can select your choice including hate speech for what it is
ATHEISM IS A TEMPORARY CONDITION IF YOU PLAY IT OUT TO THE END, YOU'LL DISCOVER YOU WERE WRONG Before we can discuss atheism, we need to define it. According to an official atheism website, atheists define themselves this way: “Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.” Those who identify as atheists prefer to emphasize their lack of belief rather than the refusal to believe. They consider atheism to be intellectually superior to faith in God. However, this definition clashes with the biblical worldview, which states, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1; 53:1). Since atheists can agree with people of faith that every human being has the freedom to choose what he or she thinks or believes, we will define atheism here as the choice to disbelieve in any kind of Supreme Being to which mankind is accountable. Statistics show that atheism is on the rise in countries that have historically had a strong Christian influence. These statistics include those raised in godless homes, but they also show an alarming increase among those who once held to some form of religious faith. When we hear of a prominent figure in Christianity renouncing the faith he or she used to claim, we are left wondering, “Why?” Why would so many people stop believing in God when His handiwork is everywhere (Psalm 19:1; 97:6; Romans 1:20)? Every culture on earth recognizes some form of deity, so why are so many people claiming they do not believe in any god at all? There are several reasons people may define themselves as atheists. The first is ignorance. Due to lack of correct information, a person may conclude that nothing exists beyond this universe and man’s experience of it. Since there remains a great deal we do not know, ignorance often invents ideas to fill in the blanks. This often results in either false religions or atheism. Sketchy information about God is often tainted by mythology or religious superstition to the extent that anything supernatural sounds like a fairy tale. Exposed to a mishmash of confusing claims, some people decide there is no truth to any of it and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Disillusionment is another reason some people become atheists. Due to negative experiences, such as having a prayer go unanswered or seeing hypocritical behavior in others, a person may conclude that God does not exist. This response is often fueled by anger or hurt. These people reason that, if God existed, He would behave in ways they could comprehend or agree with. Since He did not respond the way they wanted Him to, they conclude that He must not exist at all. They may stumble over complicated concepts such as hell, Old Testament genocide, or eternity and conclude the God of the Bible is too confusing to be real. Disillusionment propels people to find comfort in what is seen and known, rather than an invisible deity. To avoid the possibility of more disappointment, they abandon any attempt at faith and find a measure of comfort in deciding that God simply does not exist. Closely linked to the disillusioned are those who call themselves “atheists” when, in fact, they are anti-God. Atheist is a label some hide behind to mask a deep hatred toward God. Often due to childhood trauma or abuse in the name of religion, these people are consumed by an antipathy toward all things religious. The only way they can retaliate against a God they consider cruel is to deny Him vehemently. Events of the past have left wounds so deep that it is easier to deny the reality of God than admit that they hate Him. True atheists would not include this group in their numbers, as they recognize that to be angry with God is to acknowledge His existence. But many people do, in fact, call themselves atheists while simultaneously expressing outrage toward a God whose existence they deny. Still others reject the idea of God because they want Him to be easier to find. When well-known atheist Richard Dawkins was asked, “What would you say if you faced God after death?” he responded, “I would say to Him, ‘Why did you take such great pains to conceal yourself?’” Some people frown at the fact that God is Spirit, invisible, and found only through faith (Hebrews 11:6; Jeremiah 29:13). They adopt the attitude that the Creator of the universe owes them evidence of His existence beyond what He has already lavishly given (Psalm 19:1; 102:25; Romans 1:20). Jesus dealt with this mindset when He walked the earth. In Mark 8, Jesus had just fed four thousand people with a sack lunch, but the intellectual elites came to Him demanding that He perform a sign to “prove” He was the Messiah (verse11). Jesus illustrated this hardness of heart in His parable about the rich man in hell who longed to warn his brothers about what awaited them after death (Luke 16:19-31). From heaven, Abraham answered, “If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” The most likely explanation for the continuing rise of atheism has not changed since the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:6; Romans 3:23). The very essence of all sin is self-determination. By denying the existence of a Creator, atheists can do whatever they please without concern for future judgment or eternal consequences (Matthew 12:36; Romans 14:12; 1 Peter 4:5; Hebrews 4:13). In the twenty-first century, self-worship has become culturally acceptable. Atheism appeals to a generation raised on evolutionary theory and moral relativism. John 3:19 says, “Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.” If human beings are self-created, self-determined, and self-centered, then there is no moral law or lawgiver to whom they must submit. There are no absolutes and no one to whom they are ultimately accountable. By adopting such a mindset, atheists can focus on seeking pleasure in this life alone. As long as scientists, professors, and philosophers peddle their atheistic viewpoints as truth and wisdom, people will continue to buy it because the idea of self-determination appeals to our rebellious natures. The attitude is nothing new, but the changing cultural norms are making it more openly acceptable. Romans 1:18-31 details the results of this rejection of God’s authority. Verse 28 says, “God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.” Our world is seeing the results of that depravity. What atheists call “enlightenment,” God calls foolishness. Verses 22-23 say, “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools.” Since the “fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Psalm 111:10; Proverbs 1:7; 9:10), then the denial of the Lord (atheism) is the beginning of foolishness.
I have been an atheist for 30 years and have had many religious folks say they can save me. The only things they prove is they know nothing about the bible and are religious for selfish reasons, like their prayers were answered. I always ask "how about those that pray and never have their prayers answered?" The response is basically that they done care about that because theirs were answered. This is one of the many reasons I am an atheist
Hitchens' statements need no spinning, no clarifications, no Wednesday night meetings for explanations and context, and most importantly, no faith that one day those that your currently do not understand will all make sense. An incisive and moralistic mind is to be emulated and admired in the exact fashion that religion can not possibly match. Hitchens, you lived well and you continue to inspire.
An alternative explanation is various legends of Jesus (like Paul Bunyan) existed. The gospel writers had to stitch all these conflicting accounts together. There was no historic Jesus.
Note also that Abraham and Moses are as real as Robin Hood and King Arthur, never existed. Even the earliest christians didn't believe in a literal Jesus figure as much as they believed he was a spiritual emissary between heaven and earth. The Romans changed everything when they took it over after defeating their opponents, then wrote the book.
Christopher my dear man!!! Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. You didn't hope for the love of Jesus, you did not see him with your eyes. So when you left this world you were separated from the very reason for all of the answers you thought you knew!
+Ken McNutt II but do you have the primary sources and and contemporaneous historical accounts to support the claim that the jesus character was a man?
+Morgan Hastings Obviously entire books have been written on the subject both ways. My favorite book on the subject is "Did Jesus Exist" by Bart Ehrman. I'm not about to write a book on the subject here, but just consider one point: The Crucifixion is not something that Messianic Jews would invent. Many of the stories of Jesus' life happened, but since they ran counter to what became Christian theology, they had to be highly mythologized. There is no doubt that Pagan elements run throughout the New Testament, but all that really proves is that early Christians were attempting to convert gentiles (especially followers of Pauline theology). I can give you a few more examples if you wish.
Ken McNutt II i think that considering that the historicity of the jesus character is true simply because of employing the use of a crucifixion would be a fallacy of an appeal to ignorance; it's not something that can be disproven. however ehrman has his own reasoning for thinking the historicity is true, just as carrier's peer-reviewed book shows that there is only a 33% chance that the historicity is true. the idea that possibly therefore probably is quite fallacious. it's obvious that if the character was a real person it would be very different from the mythologized story. however, if we're getting to the point where the mythologized story is obviously bunk then it doesn't matter if the jesus character was real. just as obviously there is no santa claus, even if there was a st. nicholas. there is is no santa claus. and there still is no jesus. until the religious can provide the empirical evidence for their deity it really makes absolutely no difference if there is an higher percentage of historicity than 33%. that it is only 33% only confirms the absurdity of the whole christian mythology and their desperation to make it real.
+Morgan Hastings I was just giving you one of many examples. The 33% chance you cite sounds like Carrier pulled that number out of his ass. It does matter if Jesus was real only because it provides an example of how real events can evolve into mythology. Jesus was 100% real. Christ was 0% real. Although Carrier's knowledge regarding ancient history is undeniable, his knowledge of the Bible and religion is dwarfed by Ehrman's. Like I said, the evidence isn't just based around one event. The entire story has small grains of truth running throughout it.
Ken McNutt II nope, that actually came from the bayes theorem. another fallacy is over-confidence is fallacious. you have no grounds for 100% historicity. if you did you'd be able to present some primary sources.
House of David? Isn't that proof all by itself? The messiah was to be fathered by a descendant of David, but Joseph was not jesus father right? If the birth was immaculate, and God was the father, then jesus was not from the house of David.
Hitchens was required to study the bible in school as a child and he did his research. I don't think he was a liar. He exposed lies and the bible is not only confusing, its not even a book to look for truth in any way. I'm disgusted that so many people think it's a good book to die for. Jesus was a nut case if he was anyone that existed and more people should get with the modern times.
Daaoyi Yes the onkly truth is lord jesus super jew!!! All who dont repent will burn forever!!!!! tale me now my lord!!! how i tire of these heathens!!!
Hitch was highly educated, erudite, knowledgeable, articulate. He hated injustice. And atheists do not have propaganda. We don't have an agenda, unlike Christianity. We don't care if you believe or don't believe. We just like to pull your strings a little when you make dumb remarks. If there is a loving God he loved Hitch and welcomed him to heaven.
The take no thought for tomorrow in context means “anxious thought “ and was addressed to his disciples who were being provided for because they are in the faith
There are so good ones coming up. I like: David Fitzgerald, Matt Dillahunty from the Atheist Experience on TH-cam, Richard Carrier and another one whose name I can't remember.
'Have no thoughts for the 'morrow' doesn't sound too different from living in the present moment, and that is being more and more embraced now. I'm on a spiritual path (more Zen Buddhist / Taoist) and it does lead to a very different experience of the world - one where the world, material, circumstances etc. are less important than our response, our growth, our understanding etc. 'Having no thoughts for the 'morrow' doesn't sound maniacal to me, it just seems to me that Jesus was not putting much emphasis on worldly development, and, indeed, beyond meeting our basic survival needs, there isn't much in our material development that is THAT imperative... it's just useful, nice, helpful, convenient, comfortable etc. Whether I live in a world with iPads or without, with internet or without, with ready meals or not, makes no difference to what and where my focus and meaning lies. I think Jesus was the same. If you relate his words to 'oh but how would we build bridges' or 'what about my child's education' then, yeah, it might make little sense, but then that's only because you put import on those things when, really, these are things 8.7 million other species on this planet have survived and thrived without for billions of years, and that we survived and thrived without for billions of years of evolution. It comes down to context, and context is always going to be defined by what we deem as important. Quite simply Jesus - and most devoutly spiritual people - do not lay much emphasis on worldly things... and for good reason. I experience infinitely more happiness and peace and enjoyment of life from sitting in meditation than from playing xBox. I appreciate people like Hitchens hacking at the bullshit, but it would have been great if he had also taken an honest, open minded interest in the substance behind it all.
***** Hmmm. I don't think that you or science are yet in the position to make that statement. I'm not saying that you are right or wrong, just that that is a little too premature given the experiences that some highly developed spiritual individuals experience that i'm not sure brain chemicals are going to explain.
***** This is a discussion about belief in God. This is not what advanced spiritual practitioners experience. How can a brain experience a sense of one-ness with all that is when it is clearly separate from almost the whole of what is? When the Buddha became enlightened he reported seeing the moon and experiencing the moon as himself as much as his arms. How could this be if spiritual / religious experience exists only in the brain? You might claim that he was delusional, but his experiences are not exclusive, and so you either take them seriously or dismiss them. That's your choice. I like people like Sam Harris who recognise that these often repeated experiences dating back thousands of years must surely have some substance behind them... I think that is a fair and rational position. I'm sure you yourself will acknowledge that as far as studies of consciousness go (the highest states of which might be what we regard as 'God') are poorly understood and elementary in terms of scientific study.
***** Meditation might affect the brain, but it doesn't mean the brain is responsible for 'heightened states'... although a heightened state might affect the brain and thus show up on the screenings you are talking about. It would have to be asked why and how our biology has managed to produce a brain that is capable of indescribable states of consciousness and yet for some reason has kept us from accessing it with any kind of ease. When did our brain develop this capacity for experiencing 'nirvana', when did we lose it, why did we lose it, why is their no recorded history of humans living in this state, and so on. I don't think that the brain is a producer of consciousness, but rather a receiver that attracts, decodes and interprets states of consciousness into the physical realm. A bit like a radio, I suppose.
***** It's not really something that can be thoroughly argued. For the foreseeable future it's likely we'll need to await death to discover personally if consciousness survives separately from the brain. Obviously as of now none of us know, and speculating isn't particularly interesting. But returning to the 'state of Nirvana exists in the brain'... Again, if this is so then what could be the evolutionary benefit of such a state of mind given it is one that serves little function in surviving (endless love, compassion, peace, connectivity with all living beings etc. is not exactly a recipe for staying alive in cruel nature), and why is not accessible to us nor ever seems to have been accessible to us (asides from devoted spiritual practitioners)? There is no history of such a state of mind having permeated mankind, unless of course this is the state of heaven discussed in the Bible before man's fall...?
***** Sex being pleasurable has a huge evolutionary function as it gives us a very strong incentive to procreate. If everyone lived in a state of Nirvana then we would of course exist in a utopian paradise, but we are nowhere near that point, and we have to exist in a situation where knuckle heads who want to beat us up and steal our things continue to roam, and so it just isn't plausible that a state of mind that would prefer to be killed than to kill has developed inside of the brain... why would it? And, again, why is it so inaccessible? If it's there and it serves a function then who do we not all experience it? Why is our brain electing to lock up a part of itself that every single human being on this planet would love to experience... a part of the brain that would allow us to reside in endless bliss, peace and joy? I think our brain is able to tune into these higher states much as a radio can tune into different stations, but I don't think these states exist within the brain.
Brendan Butler I think the story of Jesus was directed only to ( the jews of him time) .After the destruction of the second temple, a new religion with a new ethos has to be created so this " saying" is just a sort of a consolation to the people around him at that particular time.It shouldn't have been embraced as a saying with eternal truth.
So the whole AA and 12 step community who've successfully moved countless individuals from destitution and despair to healthy sobriety are mad when they say "one day at a time"?
When a person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity - When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion. ~ Robert M. Pirsig ~ - in other words you can't discuss reality with someone suffering from delusion.
I imagine centuries ago groups of people were ordered to create a religion for their society to control their people, which they simply studied previous religions and took bits and pieces from all that predated the current religions of today.
That's your reality sadly. That imagination of yours is your limitation. - Jesus is alive and present. You persacute any chance your twisted dark heart gets compelled and led by your master of puppets satan. You are being decieved but it feels to good to be bad huh? Your mind and efforts are not your own. They only serve satan not you. You're a slave to him.
carpejkdiem Ask yourself for a second, how is it impossible that you're not being deceived and that every religion is a deception ......... i'll wait for a logical response without the usage of scriptures from the bible.
Fan Man You play childlike games. Parrot your masters you serve to change the subject. This is not an argument not a debate and not about religion. Simply the truth. Deal.
carpejkdiem There used to be a God of fire, water, thunder, lightning, wind, and thousands of other Gods. This should be clear beyond belief that God is a man made concept if these Gods were created before these new Gods. Mental slavery at it's best ....... we've been conditioned to believe in God due to not having answers for nature.
Fan Man Sad case of lucifarian m.k.ultra fried prepped for the socialist world takeover of the Old new world order one world religion where your god you will worship or be killed. Make fun like a fool. God says we all know He's real in our hearts. You've heard the truth that can set you free. You chose to be powerless to your sinlusts. A slave and a puppet for your god of this world choice. If not murdered in the process or die naturally. You'll be a slave for the elite at best. Either way you're a dead man walking now, as it is zombie robotopulous for the agenda for you. You serve a master. Denying Christ with pride is playing the jester.
We all have to open our mind's. Because if Jesus really existed, why isn't there any real proof of his existence. Especially when Rome documented everything, and thousands documented events that happened, yet there is nothing, only what's written in the Bible.
@@bobmarks030344 I've seen this man wipe the floor with the best theocrats could conjure up to go against him only to have them come to a kind understanding at the end and go out for a pint afterwards. This video is far from his best.
Archaeology has proven that the town Jesus was born in DID NOT EXIST at the time he was supposed to be born. That ground is free of artifacts in that layer. There wasn't even a town there! So, the town lay elsewhere (which still doesn't mean any specific person was born there).
Dig deeper. If you search diligently for archaeological clues, you will find them. Sometimes, it may at first lay hidden from one's sight, until one looks to a land's history. According to Wikipedia, Bethlehem-(the town in south Jerusalem where Jesus was born)-suffered great damages due to post war effects. It was founded 1,400 years before the birth of Jesus Christ. This means that it was already an established town, before his birth. Also beware, not every research source may be trustworthy.
I'm with Hitch. I feel that there was an actual person in the 1st century that got the attention of people in some way. However, I believe that the guy was a decent guy. Much more was added and twisted around in the gospels. Tacitus, a pagan and Josephus, a Jew wrote about him early.
+QueenFanPiper62 about tacitus. i often hear from christians talking about him like he was an eye-witness of some sort. he wasn't. he was born in 55 ad and he wrote his annals in 116 ad. and i always thought of that passage 15/44 as being a later christian interpolation. christian monks are known to have done things like that in their missionary zeal. it's a christian phenomenon. i think it's called "lying for jesus". you know, for the cause..
carryall69 Yes! But, from what I understand I that he wrote sarcastically about Jesus. If several people from different views write about the same guy it seems likely that someone existed. Or that the Jesus thing was more of a 1st century movement in which several characters helped create the remembrance. Kind of like a Paul Bunion legend. I find it unlikely that a religion with that much fervor would just leap off the ground without someone or a profound movement stirred by a messianic wishful thinking in which several figures played a roll. There is a Jewish version that places someone like Jesus living around 100 B.C. The problem is and it is the billion $$$ question why did no one mention this guy around 30 C.E? Perhaps little really happened. If the temple curtain tore in 2 the Romans and possibly the Persians would have recorded it. Funny! My 16 year old son asked me a few years ago as to why it took so long to write the gospels. I told him that one needs to make sure every one is dead before he starts making up shit.
QueenFanPiper62 tacitus describes how nero blamed the fire of rome on "a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace" and then goes on to describe how christus "suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus", how the christians were all arrested and killed and in graphic details. the whole passage sounds like this: the poor christians and evil nero. what makes this whole passage odd, is that it seems to imitate tacitus style but seems to drift away from his focus. he gets too excited, almost like he forgets that he is just an historian when he writes how "Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired". you know, almost as if tacitus was aiming for pulitzer. some argue that only the passage about christus is an interpolation, others go further and argue the whole episode is fake and an attempt to smuggle christians in and to give them martyrs aura. like see, the romans did take notice and we were persecuted by nero in person! the passion of the early christians. died for christ, so romantic. so mel gibsony.. but back to the historicity of jesus.. you know, one possibility is that it all started with paul, babbling about a jewish messiah of whom he had visions of - which was kinda common as a meme for the jews to resonate with - inspiring mark and the others who turned it into a new samson tale or a jewish version of the hercules myth . i wouldn't be surprised if paragon figures start completely fictional and grew real in time. i mean after all, neither paul nor mark, luke, matthew and john are considered to have eyewitnessed him for real. it's all hear say and the only one who had desert visions was paul the epileptic. as a bonus, did you know that epilepsy in old ireland was known as "saint paul disease"?
Dustin F I became obsessed with getting the hell out of Alabama and the South. I was incredibly fortunate to come to Canada when it was much easier to get landed status. Many of the problems and ugliness of the South grows directly out of the Southern Baptist and other politicized authoritarian churches, such as the Church of God. Having a church on every block is the hallmark of a nasty backwards place. You have my sincere sympathy. I hope you can leave sooner than layer.
And yet brain scans reveal a religious area of the brain. Usually when evolution spends resources on a thing, it has a purpose.... @Dr Rick, if you are so unobservant as to reduce religion to a tool, then I can't picture how we could communicate on the topic. But then, I note the way Hitchen misquotes CS Lewis in order to 'prove' his point, and I see you are two of a kind. Religious fanaticism is not confined to theism apparently.
John Kricorian (Krico) No scans show there are effects of religious practices on the brain. There is no religious are to the brain. These effects are the literal shutting off of certain parts of brain function. In other words, you quite literally use less brainpower when partaking in religious activities. The same can be found in meditation. Hitchens didn't misquote Lewis either, he paraphrased him. As for the purpose of religion, rather ironically it's the human brains natural evolutionary capability to percieving purpose and patterns. Religion is the by-product, not the source of such an evolutionary adaptation. Furthermore if you thinking evolution spends resources then you have absolutely no idea what it is and we will not be able to communicate on the topic.
Actually, as I understand it, Jesus was called "of Nazareth" because that was where he grew up, not where he was born. His family settled in Nazareth rather than Bethlehem because Herod's son had a bad reputation (all of the birth, flight to Egypt, return to Nazareth supposedly fulfills prophecy from the old testament). Hitchens implies "Jesus of Nazareth" meant he was born in Nazareth in order for his argument to make sense. I'm playing devil's advocate here by the way. My personal belief is that the whole Jesus myth is simply a retell of the story of the Egyptian god Osiris, just in a different historical context with a monotheistic view (got to get rid of those damn pagans). The similarities are just too remarkable to be coincidence IMO.
The One who get the Name of God are alought to Build him a HOUSE OF GOD IN JERUSALEM. "The Deadones should burry theey Deadones and the Livingones stay together with the The livingones so that all out of Israel get Salvation. " The LORD JESUS CHRIST, 2006. Words of Life and Peace. And the God who made HEAVEN and EARTH has given me HIS My Nw Name. Aiwa- Right and Justice in Heaven and on Earth. Chairs of Justize are STANDING in JERUSALEM. The TOWN of GOD wearing MY Name. The Town of the Chairs of King Davids House. ( Not the Chairs of the Son of God. Not the Chairs of God. ) Where is there a Town of God Jerusalem on Earth? "NOW i,ve seen it with my own Eys. You should not dring the Cup anymore. I gonna give it too YOUR ENEMIES. At the END Babylon. But Start with Jerusalem. ONE HOUSE OF GOD ON THE WHOLE EARTH. ONE TEMPLE TOO JERUSALEM. WHO ARE THE ENIMIES OF ZION- JERUSALEM. Its a false Worship of God to give your life into Dead for Someone else Sins. The Lord will let free the Capitivity of ZIon. ALL OUT OF ISRAEL. ALL who stay in the Commands of Zion. All Nations have too come too Zion too learn the Commands of Zion. Ten Commands. The Commands of Peace and Freedom. DONT LIE. Every Sunday a New Word of God. All we will see who has the Word of God and stay alive. Who ís the Wife of GOD. The Daughter Jerusalem-.The Daughter Zion. So, God have too deside ONES and for ever who is HIS Sons. Born by HIS Maid Maria? Or Born by One of His Wifes wearing his Name. All Eyes will see when The Lord return too Zion. I,m in Austria. Who is the Son of Abraham. The Slave Born one? Or the One Born by the Woman Sarah? Where is the Temple of God that Jesus Christ gonna build in 3 Days? This is the Word of GOD. I Promise you. You shall get your King David. Why? Where are the Apostel of Jesus Christ too say ONE SENTENCE TO HIS FOLLOWERS, ALL CHRISTS, ALL LAWLESS? Why he come too Me the MURDERING TOWN Jerusalem? Remember 2000 Years ago? Tell the Daughter Zion : YOUR KING COME TOO YOU. After that He was killed, cause he Didnt has SOMEONE STANDING BEHIND HIM. 2000 Years ago and NOW again. since 2006. Believe what you wanna believe. You can try it YOURSELF. 3. Buch Mose. The Law too call the God of Israel. The Law Mose always use. For the Ones who follow the Commands of Zion. All Blessings are Send too Zion. Anyway we are at Psalm 2 since 2006. In None of all Houses of God on the Whole Earth the HOLY SPIRIT HAS NOTHING TOO SAY. One Sentence of the Son of God. All Nation have too go back into they own Contries and prepare for WAR against Mount Zion. One Earth-One King -One God-My God. All Tribes of Israel are Save. All Tribes of Israel are blessed out of Zion in the Name of the Lord Lord Zebaoth, the God of Israel I,m wearing. I bounded the Satan 2005/2006 with the Strenght and Power of Zion for 1000 year. I hunt Nebukadfnezar, the King of babel with Peace into Hell. I fight against Hell and I win. Hell is on my Right Side. All enimies of Zion gonna die. And all killed by the Daughter Zion never get a live again. But go too the Pope, or the Chefapostel or whatever. God is SURELY SPEAKING TOO THEM. All men are Born in Zion the Mother of the Nations. No . All Men are Born By Abraham the Father of the Nations. The Son of God should Heritage His Fathers Throne King David. ? No cause ist a False Worship of God too give your Life into Dead for someone else Sin. Any way where are HIS FOLLOWERS. WHO Can say One Sentence of God? Nowhere too find. Revelation: Yes you have proof them all and find out that they are NOT APOSTEL .Mehr anzeigen (131 Zeilen
I'm not a Christen but I have studied it a bit. The Gospels are not historically accurate; Mark, the one closest to the events was written 60 years after Jesus' death. the others a hundred years or more. No one was alive that witnessed any of the actual events and certainly not the Nativity. So where did the story come from? The writers of the Gospels looked to Old Testament prophecies to fill in the blanks and each author added their own spin to it. It didn't occur in December either. Using dates from the Bible it can be worked out that he was most likely born in September or October. December 25th is around the time of the Winter Solstice which was a great festival in the Roman world and most other cultures too, the return of the light, the Sun. He really should have talked to someone that knew something about it. I heard this from a Jesuit priest and others.
I'm waiting to hear the response of the defenders of Bible infallibility on this one too. I'm not sure I've heard a really good defence of the authenticity of the Gospels' content yet. But surely the Roman Empire's political strategy of grafting ideas from the new official Christian religion on to traditional 'pagan' beliefs and festivals is pretty well understood? Or, maybe not - at least not by the sort of American Evangelicals who appear to be capable of believing in all sorts of silliness, with tremendous zeal, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, preferring to not question the mainstays of the selective and often fanciful religious teaching they've been conditioned by.
The Gospels are historically accurate, and your dates for authorship are incorrect. Scholars believe the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke to have been written before 70 A.D. The Gospel of John is thought to have been written around 80 A.D (The MacArthur Study Bible). These dates are based on the historical-contextual evidence within the texts. The texts corroborate themselves within themselves as well as with what secular historians know about the time period (who wrote then and now). If you consider that Christ would have been crucified around 33 A.D., this is completely feasible. On top of that, His birth was foretold of in the Old Testament (e.g. Micah 5:2 and Isaiah 7:14). The destruction of the Jewish Temple happened in 70 A.D., and a lot of the events in the Gospels transpired before this point. There are hundreds of prophecies in the Old Testament that Christ fulfilled in the Gospels. But the crux of your argument is, "how can these men talk about the nativity when they weren't there to witness it, and how do we know the nativity is true if the celebration of the event today is not in accordance with the historical date?" A simple answer is that Mary, his mother, could have told them--she was there for the birth and the death. I've known plenty of mothers to share stories of the birth of their children. In fact, the beginning of Matthew begins with a lengthy genealogy proving the lineage of Christ through Mary (His royal qualification as Messiah). She knew her lineage and she knew Matthew. In the Gospel of Luke, Luke says himself that he compiled the events from witnesses: "Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to use by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order. (Luke 1:1)" So, there were witnesses to His birth (the shepherds and Magi) just as there were witnesses to His death and resurrection (the Apostles and the 500). But none of that matters, right? It does matter. The Bible is the Word of the living God. It is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16). Christ was not a zealous rabbi fomenting at the mouth to bring about macro level change in a small parcel of land occupied by a tyrannical Roman government. He is God in the flesh who chose to humiliate Himself by bearing our sins on the cross. He was and is without sin and blameless, but He was killed, and He rose again on the third day. Those that believe in Him and His work and trust Him as Lord and Savior will inherit eternal life. The date of His birth is not important. The exact date is unknown. It's a celebration of what His birth ushered in. He was and is the fulfillment of all there was and is to come. Sixty-six books written over thousands of years all sync and point to His second coming.
@@kenycharles8600 The stars tell different stories to different people in different cultures in different times. The 12 days of Christmas isn't Biblical. As far as I'm concerned, it's a Christmas carol. One thing is for certain, the stars will fall and Christ will return in power and glory to collect His elect (Mark 13: 24-26). Those who do not accept Him as Lord and Savior and believe in His work on the cross will suffer eternal judgment.
The bible needs to be read from a metaphorical standpoint as well as understanding the Middle Eastern culture at the time.The original text was written in Hebrew and Aramaic and influenced by Middle Eastern philosophy, but it was translated into Latin by people influenced by Western philosophy. This was the first mistake...then religious doctrine was added to it, which caused the true meaning of the stories and accounts to be twisted beyond recognition ever since...
As far as I can tell since the beginning of every religion every deity has had a son (sun, get it) that was born from a virgin. EVERY one! All your major Christian holidays fall on pagan sun worship holy days (get it again?) and even their sabbath was changed from the 7th day, Saturday, the day of Saturn or, Satan, to SUNday, the 1st day of the week. Every Christian ritual can be followed down to very ancient pagan worship of the Sun. This is documented and proven and yet they still deny this occurrence. It boggles the mind the power religious dogma has on the uneducated and gullible. I guess that what the clerics count on for control, power and money.
***** "But never again will people be dumb enough to believe any fictional character created our Universe or allow it to be used to control us." Scientology does a good job of reeling in those dumb people you talk about and the best part for that cult is that their members all got lots of money!
+Nodrog225 Well, in college, we do have people that study harry potter films. I agree with you. Just because there's a study for it, doesn't make it any much more real. Hence why I don't understand why people take theology and expect to get a clearer answer of what they are looking for.
+wyatt1153 Christian history as written by the Church. Yeah, that's something we can all be confident in trusting as documented objective fact. Organized religion could never ever tell lies. There's never been any Christian leader that's ever done anything dishonest or immoral in the whole history of christianity. If there had been we would have had scandals but they've always been upstanding moral men of God with the perfection of Christ.
'*theory is'...you cannot have it both ways...either you can say you believe wholeheartedly in things which have not been proven or you can't, and as much as I believe in evolution of sorts, (though there is a lot of damning and missing links to the THEORY of evolution) I cannot say 'fact is we crawled out....' as much as I can say I believe 'In the beginning, God created...'. There are too many holes in the theory of evolution to even count. If you want to point something out that the masses believe that has loads of speculation and skewed information then look no further than the Theory of Evolution. I am agnostic and am open to new data and information. I do not believe in hell, which was the main impetus for me to become agnostic though I was raised Christian; I do believe in the continuation of our consciousness', simply because i do not believe that things (or beings) happen for no reason. Before rebuttal, read a little into how utterly improbable it is for us to go from a fish to a human being in such a short time span geologically speaking and why it seems that the engine of evolution has suddenly stalled when for it to have worked as it had in the past, there should be 'evolution galore' everywhere we look every generation to the next within species today. As I said, I believe there is some merit to the Theory of Evolution, but I do also believe it was driven by a kind of 'Intelligent Design' for which I need not get into rhetoric because certain words so shut down those of the "scientific inclination'.
"utterly improbable it is for us to go from a fish to a human being in such a short time span geologically speaking" - I think before rebuttal you should should go to a museum and gain some perspective of how long millions of years can be. I used to be religious too mate I really was. I prayed almost every night. But then I went to uni and learned how to think critically. Then I began to research for myself and draw my own conclusions. You're agnostic so you are close my friend. Just keep an open mind and gradually try to ween yourself off the religion. Peace.
But I'm not really religious. I'm quite the opposite. I realize that the Earth is around 4 billion years old and that the universe was created around 13.7 billion years ago. I think that secular religion has hijacked the reality of a designer to the universe. I cannot believe that chance and coincidence can lead to our universe out of nothingness and then that life on our planet sprang from innate and inorganic molecules since it has never been able to be created in a laboratory. There are just too many variables to there NOT being life even if you can swallow the theory that the entire universe was somehow able to just 'happen' from an infinitely small 'nothing'. I do not understand why it is easier to believe in that than for a scientist to say 'yeah, maybe since somethingness has never sprung from nothingness in any of my experiments, then maybe someone had to get the whole thing started'. But THAT would be a stretch...it's easier to to believe that other theory... My point about being agnostic is that I DO believe in a designer. I do believe there is more to existence than this one go around, but I will not say that I CAN know because I do not and cannot because it has not been revealed to me.
Non-belief should not be such a point of pride to an atheist, that just proves my point about them kinda being assholes. Your belief in completely unprovable events and someone else belief in a completely unprovable creator should cancel out any sense of achievement you should have about swaying someone to your 'side'.
***** Asking a question? No, just a remark but now that I have your attention, replies are disabled on the other thread so I'll put this here. Hope you can follow. “Carrier is not trained in NT scholarship and Murdock is not a scholar at all. But that is beside the point, most NT Scholars and Ancient Historians are of the opinion that Jesus was a real person.” You are full of yourself aren’t you? Carrier and Murdoch are scholars despite the protestations of internet theists who wish to define the term to include only people who share their biases. And there a many other scholars who agree that Jesus is a mythological figure. To accept only what Carrier and Murdock say, and to dismiss NT Scholars as not having a valid opinion is to show your bias. I never said anything of the sort. I realize there is a difference of opinion on this issue, I am not dismissing anyone's opinion (as you are) I am stating which opinion seems most plausible to me based on what I have watched. And you by attacking me for having a bias you have damaged my irony meter. You owe me one.
***** Cosmic Warrior is on a great cosmic journey beyond all of our abilities to comprehend. It certainly was good of him to pop into this chat and call a dead public intellectual an "odious little toad". Thank you oh great traveler. You have contributed much to our knowledge and understanding of this mortal coil.
Christians aren't allowed to gossip or insult people. They have to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. None of them do these things, especially in the United States. Social media is dominated by rude, vile, and hateful comments from these people.
The RNC spent the last 40 years training them to become a reliable voter block who will vote against their own self interests. Trump had nonconstituency of his own so he did a hostile takeover of the RNC who never imagined that a guy with no Christian bona fides could own and operate their voter block.
And that is the truth about those Hebrew archaeologists saying the story is crap. I love love love Israel Finkelstein!! He THINKS and he won't just believe.
+Tristan Smith Ah yes I've heard of dry counties. I heard that the distillery of Jack Daniels is in a dry county. I actually heard it's illegal to buy alcohol there any day of the week...
Abouy 2600 years ago Siddhartha Gautama said, "Anyone who believes what I have taught without putting it to the test is a fool." All of Gautama Buddha's teachings can be scrutinized and tested in any reality one finds oneself in, except maybe Nirvana without remainder, although quantum mechanics points to the realization it may be none other than hyperspace.
+Alan Keyes I also like them; though Dawkins has not the intellect of a Hitchens. Dawkins also seems closed minded. Hitchens went through periods of change and readily admitted to them. Dawkins needs to do what he said he would do and take ayahuasca. However, he demands to only take it under medical approved application. I don't think there is such a thing; and the experience with a fully trained guide is imperative. Were Hitchens alive today, I suspect he would jump at the chance.
the one remark which leaves me baffled about Jesus as Messiah-whether it was said or not-or misinterpreted through time-as many things suffer this was: ONLY THROUGH ME SHALL YOU ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. ookay...well, what happens to everyone else, if it is asked: hmm..why is that so, seems pretty narcissistic to me and maniacal.
Marti Odalyz Well, if it helps, you could think of if this way: The Kingdom of Heaven is where all is eternally perfect. That's a state that doesn't exist anywhere in the known universe, as the universe and all it contains had a beginning, ergo: non-eternal. It follows that imperfect humankind cannot reach perfect Heaven by its own merits, as it's a logical impossibility for the imperfect to perfect itself. The Christian claim that Jesus is both fully God and fully Man means that by Christ, humankind can be perfected so as to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. If Jesus Christ wasn't God, then yes, the conclusion that you arrive at would be correct: it would be a truly evil person to promise salvation for a man's eternal soul and not deliver. Thankfully that isn't the case. Jesus' resurrection, which has never successfully been refuted for 2000 yrs despite unrelenting hostile challenges (His crucifixion being the most extreme example), establishes His Divinity and backs up everything He said and did. John 14:6 Jesus said to him (Thomas), "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
elizabeth bunn What sort of "real proof" do you have in mind? The reason I ask is that very often for those who ask for proof, no proofs that are offered are considered satisfactory by them, regardless of how reasonable the proofs are. This is because proof of the sort that is 100% undeniable only really exists theoretically, such as in the field of mathematics. In reality, arguments that "prove" a claim at best only do so to the point that it is more reasonable than not that the claim is true. At its highest level this standard of proof is reflected in the justice system for the western world, where "beyond a reasonable doubt" is considered proof.
Yes that verse has been so destructive. John was writing church doctrine. Notice how arrogant JC comes across when in the earlier gospels he wrote in parables?
Marti Odalyz - Your question is so easily answered... however by asking that question and trying to attach any merit to it proves when answered you still would not understand.
Hitchens obviously did not teach you that much about Atheism, other wise why say RIP? If there is nothing after life then there is no Peace or Rest. There is no up or down, left or right, right or wrong. All there would be, would be, an unending absolute ZERO! You should spend a little time every day contemplating that. If you do not completely agree with this then I suspect that there is still a little bit of Theism left in you.
Rest in peace can mean whatever the reader ascribes to it. It was not my intent to imply "I will see (Hitchens) on the other side." I meant it as "so long friend I was never privileged to meet"...sorry if anyone misunderstood...
***** To who? How? I've read most of his books and listened to every episode of his podcast and I've never heard him say anything that should be offensive to anyone reasonable.
+Qwerty Qwertz Not as much as he misses you. He is burning in hell right now. He is no longer an atheist. He would give anything to come back and see you.
i only recently discovered hitchens' work i hope he is in a peaceful state now in a higher consciousness somehow. i hope he wouldnt be offended by that. i don't think he would though - he struck me as a thoroughly articulate, open-minded man. i am trying to return to that place of peace myself sooner or later having battled and suffered from depression, on and off, for nigh on 15 yrs now. if i'm to be honest, it has stemmed from good old irish catholic guilt. i want to find the strength to overcome it, i've never genuinely felt any benefit from it. buddhism and spirituality of a personal nature have been much more helpful. anyway stay strong if u feel trod upon by unjustified dogmas. this might be the start of a more substantial text from me. until then i will leave you good people in a climate free of my belligerence
Sometimes just for Curiosity sake I take a look At some Of the people That believe So totally In their religion And I have come to the conclusion That teaching my Golden Retriever Trigonometry Would be Much easier Then to try and change their minds .But I do Think That on some level It does give them Comfort In some way. As the human race Continues to evolve, Religion will continue to fade away As science Learns more and mora. It may be in 100 Years Or a thousand years It doesn't really matter. I firmly believe it will happen.... Just a foot note here --I will always remember the day that I became an atheist. I was in the car with my father And I remember him pointing to a Traffic signal pole That was painted yellow And he said Everybody in the world Can believe that Pole is solid Gold But that does not make it Solid Gold. I was just a child of 11 At the time And I found comfort in this because I had been feeling so guilty About Not being able To believe In Jesus Christ, Because it seemed that everyone I knew or came in contact with Did.
Shramek's Video & 4K Photography Religion is man’s invention, not God’s. When Jesus came to Earth, man already had one of the most sophisticated religions ever known. He didn’t come to start another one. He came to restore the relationship between God and man.
They already did mythicist and archeologist. Do some study and find out. No lord Yaweh nor a virgin birth Jesus existed nor did Nazareth or Bethlehem existed ! YOU are the one who has to proof it did for they are your religious claims ... too bad you cannot proof it and never have done. ! dumbo do some study nutcase.
One myth becomes a new myth Joseph and Jesus 1. Joseph was a shepherd (37:2); Jesus is the Great Shepherd (John 10). 2. Joseph was opposed to and exposed evil (37:2); Jesus did the same. 3. Joseph was loved by the his father (37:3-4); Jesus was beloved by the Father.(Mat. 3:17; 17:5; John 10:17; Philippians 2:9) 4. Joseph was hated by his brothers (37:4); Jesus was hated by His brothers (John 1:11; Luke 19:14). 5. Joseph was hated for his words (37:8); Jesus was hated for His words of truth. (John 7:7; 3:32) 6. Joseph was promised a remarkable future (37:7-12); Jesus looked passed the cross to the joy set before Him (Isaiah 9:6, 7; Luke 1:31-33; Hebrews 12:2). 7. Joseph foretold of his future sovereignty (37:7-12); Jesus did the same. (Mat. 26:64) 8. Joseph was envied by his brothers (37:11); Jesus was envied by His. (Mat. 27:17-18) 9. Joseph was sent by his father to his brothers (37:13); Jesus was sent to the ‘lost sheep of Israel,’ by His father (John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40; 12:48-50; 17:21) 10. Joseph seeks out his brothers (37:14-17); Jesus sought out His (Luke 19:10) 11. Joseph seeks the welfare of his brothers (37:14); Jesus came not to condemn but that the world might be saved through Him. (John 3:17) 12. Joseph seeks his brothers until he finds them; Jesus seeks us until He finds us. And this at the initiative of the f(F)ather. 13. Joseph was conspired against (37:18); Jesus was also conspired against. (Mat. 12:14) 14. Joseph’s brothers did not believe his dreams (37:19, 29); Jesus’ brethren did not believe His words. (Mat. 27:39-43; John 3:18, 36) 15. Joseph was stripped of his coat (37:23); Jesus was stripped of His coat. (Mat. 27:27, 28; John 19:23) 16. Joseph was cast into a pit (37:24); Jesus was thrown into a grave. 17. Joseph was taken out of the pit, alive in his body (37:28); Jesus was bodily-resurrected from the tomb (pit). 18. Joseph’s brothers mingled hypocrisy with their hatred (37:27); the Jews did the same with Jesus (Mat. 27:35, 36; John 18:28, 31) 19. Joseph is sold for the price of a slave(37:38); Jesus was sold for thirty pieces of silver (the price of a slave). 20. Judah suggested the idea of selling his brother (37:26-28); the Greek name for Judah is Judas (Mat. 1:2-3). 21. Joseph’s blood sprinkled coat (goat blood) is presented to his father (37:31); Jesus is our scapegoat and His blood was presented to the Father as a sin offering. (Leviticus 16:8-10) Chapter 39 22. Joseph becomes a servant (39:1); Jesus became a servant (Philippians 2:6, 7) 23. Joseph was a prosperous servant (39:2, 3); Jesus was also a prosperous Servant (Isaiah 52:13; 53:10) 24. Joseph’s master was well pleased with him (39:4); the Father was always pleased with what Jesus did (John 8:29). 25. Joseph, the servant, was made a blessing to others (39:5); Jesus was a blessing to the world. 26. Joseph was a goodly person (39:6); Jesus came as a servant into the world and yet lived a goodly (perfect) life. 27. Joseph was sorely tempted and did not sin(39:7-12); Jesus was tempted and did not sin (Mat. 4:1-11; Heb. 2:18; 4:15) 28. Joseph was falsely accused (39:16-18); Jesus was falsely accused (Mat. 16:59, 60). 29. Joseph attempted no defense (39:19); Jesus gave no defense at His trials (Isaiah 53:7). 30. Joseph was cast into prison, though he was innocent(39:20); Jesus is sentenced to death though Pilate found no fault in Him (John 19:4, 6). 31. Joseph thus suffered at the hands of the Gentiles (first by his brethren then by the Gentiles; Jesus was sold by His brethren then suffered at the hands of the Romans (Gentiles. 32. Joseph, the innocent one, suffered severely (Psalm 105:17, 18); Jesus suffered by crucifixion. 33. Joseph won the respect of his jailor (39:21); Jesus won the respect of a Roman centurion standing at the cross (Luke 23:47). Chapter 40 34. Joseph was numbered with transgressors (40:1-3); as it was prophesied about Jesus (Isaiah 53:12) and as it was (Mark 15:28). 35. Joseph was the means of blessing to one, but the pronouncer of judgment on the other (40:16, 17, 19); as Jesus was a blessing to one of the thieves He was crucified between (Luke 23:43). 36. Joseph evidenced his knowledge of the future and gave credit to God alone (40:8); as Jesus did the same on earth (John 12:49). 37. Joseph desired to be remembered by the butler (40:14); as Jesus said, “This do in remembrance of Me.” (Luke 22:19) Chapter 41 38. Joseph was put in prison (the tomb) but God would not allow him to remain there because God’s purpose for Joseph was not yet fulfilled. So it was with Jesus Christ, God would not allow Him to remain in the tomb (Acts 2:24). Joseph changed his prison clothes for clothes of glory as did Jesus Christ (John 20:6, 7). 39. Joseph was delivered from prison by the hand of God (God sending a dream to Pharaoh and Joseph’s testimony in 45:7-9); as God raised Jesus from the tomb (Acts 2:32; 10:40). 40. Joseph is seen now as the Revealer of secrets; compare 41:16 with the words of Jesus in John 17:8; 8:28; and 12:49.
Tell me more about how Jesus impregnated his own mother and is his own father and how you know it's true because it says so in the book of fairy tales with the talking snake, talking donkey, 900-year-old men, the sun standing still in the sky for a full day, the woman turned into a pillar of salt, the guy living inside a fish for 3 days, and zombies. LOL! 😃
Loving and forgiving Christians spewing bile and hatred, in the name of Christ, all over this comments section. Jesus would have been proud of you all. Amen.
santacruzer what is good? What is the standard of good? What is the purpose of being good? Why are you concerned with being good? Why do you need people to know that you’re good? You wish you could believe in God but worried you would be considered dumb? What is the basis for that courage of yours? Is your ego helping you or hindering you?
Christianity isn't based on facts or history. That's why it's called faith. You have to believe something that can't be proven, and never will be. There is a spiritual side to every human. There's a power that some people don't acknowledge. When groups of people gather in one mind or one accord, something happens. The bible is contradictory and isn't accurate in so many fronts. The 4 gospels don't even agree.
Its funny reading these comments that wish for eternal suffering on this guy for a mere difference of belief in the 21st century. Completely proves his point.
***** He is a Christian and he is right. Christianity tells you to pray for this guy to seek the truth in Christ rather than tell him to die.
***** They would claim that you are not a real Christian and you couldnt prove them wrong.
Daniel Chen Does Christianity tell you to call somebody an intellectually dishonest hack then wish that they became one by suddenly discarding the beliefs of a lifetime in the hopes of getting into heaven?
Human Smith I DONT WISH HIM ETERNAL SUFFERING, I wish everyone the Joy I have.
Larry Labonte But you find it perfectly reasonable that if one is not willing to believe the unbelievable that he be condemned to suffer for eternity. Seems just a little harsh doncha think?
Mark Twain on the Bible : "It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies."
Not quite. Twain called himself a freethinker, and was often jesting when calling himself a Christian, and / or speaking in a cultural sense rather than in a faith sense. However, this quote is from Twain's character, Satan, not from Twain himself. The difference is worth noting. Twain seems to have been very ambiguous about the bible, even while he was confident of the frequent, deep hypocrisy of the church and the worse hypocrisy of allegedly-christian society. It's interesting to note that the character speaking of the bible as being full of lies is in fact a biblical character. And the observations that Satan makes in the book are observations not of any lies in scripture but in how people treated each other in the name of Christ's church.
If you're going to quote Twain's characters as if they were Twain, you would have to consider quoting as his thought the thought of other characters of Twain's who at least nominally believed in God in some way, like Eve, or Methusaleh, or Eve's children.
Even for casual usage, the quoting of an author's character as if it were the author speaking seems questionable to me. It would've been good if you'd included the character and the source.
A clever jew Samuel Clemens, or Twain, knew the truth about jewish belief.
Lovely quote Duke Emzworth
@@dreamboundme & presumably you possess the proper evidence of the man's ethnicity, do you not ? we thought so
@@rakoczi29 Who is we? It's you alone and your insolence here, idiot. If you ask a question then wait for an answer. And speaking of answer, go study jewish names, it's not my duty to fill the gaps in your education.
As Robert G. Ingersoll said:
"Atheism is what happens when you read the bible. Christianity is what happens when somebody else reads it for you."
I love that! It is so true. I have religious in laws. I could tell you stories that are unbelievable. They are mentally ill. Worst of the worst. They also have a hard time hearing truth with evidence. Christians believe they are the first religion. Like 8th or 9th. Crazy.
William Bill Fish, exactly. Absolutely ruddy brilliant. People fight and argue over book's they never wrote. What was the first religion? Because nobody owns one.
I like that quote, I’m an atheist, have been since I knew what the word meant. My parents were not church attenders they offered me the chance to go to church, I did. I knew immediately I thought it was fantasy. It’s how I got my RE O level, treated it as a fairy tale. I told my RE teacher he said that’s a good way for an atheist like me to treat the bible. There’s morality I believe in but, that’s highly personal. Science is more important.
I have read all and attended Theological College, the end result I became an atheist.
Enigma 68, Thank you for your response. So many believers assume Atheists know nothing of these religious texts. When more likely than not it is the understanding of these texts that have led us to Atheism.
I find it sad that this man died before i discovered his brilliance....
Probably had to ask if he could please go back and reveal the truth to many that paid him to hear misinformation and lies. But if they/we don't believe the indisputable evidence set before them/us why would they believe him?
So did Plato, Cicero, Shakespeare, dickens, Hemingway. Don’t be sad that they died, rejoice in that they lived
Chris or Christ?
If you can read the Bible and still think God is good don't sit on a jury, *PLEASE*
As for the Christians in the comments saying Christopher is burning in Hell
just remember, you're telling us more about you that you're telling us about Christopher.
The more i read bible the more i know how cruel god is
Tom Henry:very true
You cannot get into heaven without Jesus righteousness.
@@richardgay7990 what's your level of education? Cos god is a God for ignorant people
I have a Master's Degree in Education. What you got?@@cynthia87918
in a battle of wits Hitch had to duel with many unarmed men
Christopher we miss you so much man, so much.
+Arisgod27 Not as much as he misses you. He is burning in hell right now. He is no longer an atheist. He would give anything to come back and see you.
r lee Sure think dumbass, keep believing in fairy tails.
+Arisgod27 Tails? It is spelled tales dumbass.
"Our God is a loving and forgiving god"
"Jesus loves you"
"Christopher Hitchens is burning in hell"
Common christian ideology. Tell me how does one believe God is loving and forgiving yet also believe that Christopher Hitchens is burning in hell?
The man was a good man. He believed in goodness and morales in man without the NEED for divinity. He hated the wretched and cruel things that man does in the name of religion. The cruel things depicted in the various "holy books". He argued that man doesn't NEED religion to be good.
These things don't make him profoundly immoral and malevolent aka evil.
But it wouldn't just be Christopher Hitchens either. It would be everyone who has heard the word of your particular version of God but not given their life to him. BILLIONS of people with different beliefs than yourself. All damned to hell because YOUR religion got it right.
If by the odd chance you do turn out right, then your god is an evil and cruel dictator. A disgusting excuse for an all powerful being. A vain and self centered deity that I would be appalled to claim.
If you're not Christian, I am certain you are a believer in one of the other major religions based on your comment. Thus my statement still stands.
Color me burning too.
"The man was a good man. He believed in goodness and morales in man without the NEED for divinity."
That's a good one, a good man and yet he denies his creator. Tell your mom and dad you don't know them;
see how they react.
Oh, Christopher Hitches... Such a smart and an intelligent free thinker. The world is missing him sorely.
Smart and intelligent, I agree. But as long as he is not disrespectful and condescending, otherwise his ego would diminish his humanity.
Knock knock
"Who is it?"
"It's me, Jesus. Let me in."
"Why do you want in?"
"I want to save you."
"Save me from what?"
"From what I'll do to you if you don't let me in?"
Jesus Christ is 2 in command jireh is first in command
hha hha hha - how intelligent joke!
accurate
typical comments from Biblically uneducated people
the desiples said to Jesus ,,"WE BELIEVE IN YOU"and Jesus said"YOU BELIEVE IN ME BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEEN WHAT I HAVE DONE,BUT BLESSIT WHO BELIEVES IN ME WITHOUT SEEING".so his followers did not have faith,,,Faith is what Jesus wants from us for salvation,,,Nobody can go to Heaven with sin,,so Jesus didn't to punishment for our sins for us that believe in him,,,eventhough nobody is in Heaven or Hell yet,,,,people that believe in Jesus have constant communication with him,because Jesus is in our life,,so a believer cannot deny someone who they know
I have a fairly wide vocabulary and I can articulate myself but when Hitchens spoke he did it with more eloquence and cutting ferocity than I could ever hope to achieve. To this day I still feel somewhat sorry for all the poor bastards that tried to debate him on the topic of religion. It must have been such a humbling experience for them. And well-deserved in most cases.
Sad he cant teach those poor bastards anymore : (
Christopher we all miss you. You are a inspiration for us all!!!!!!
man.i must to do my best to understand everything he says.my vocabulary is quiet limited.especially in english
Hitchens may be the greatest orator of modern times. Unshakably true, an elegant balance of purposeful emotion, inescapable logic, and simply a wonderful mind.
key trait of the unintelligent is to confuse vocabulary for intelligence, when some of the smartest rarely speak, much less publicly and about religion of all things. Could just shoot ones self instead.
As an Arabic speaker i had tough time reading his great "God is no Great" ..
i dont think theres anybody who bolstered my vocabulary as much as hitch
Then you would love terrence mckenna
The True Core Of The Jesus Myth: An extra-marital affair that got seriously out of hand.
Who can possibly replace the late, great, Christopher Hitchens. You are sorrily missed Christopher!!!
Well, if Matt Dillahunty can get an ounce or two more arrogant, and learn to moderate his "shut the fuck up!" moments, I think he has a chance to earn his place at the table...LO>E his logic...
He died for my sins 2,000 years before I was even born.
Makes perfect sense!
Faith
We should all go out an sin, then, eh? So the death wasn't in vain?
Even though Hitchens is gone, a little bit of his reasoning lectures a few time a week fights the daily insanity from others.
Yes , and then like a fool I read these idiotic comments written by the Hell Fearers and get mad. LOL
Hitchens had moments of brilliance. Unfortunately, here, he makes a fool of himself
A hero of mine and the man that opened my eyes to critical thinking and questioning everything🤔
This man was brilliant and is sorely missed.
Still waiting for the second coming of Hitchens.
Hitchens was the absolute example of knowledge over BS! This man could debate any typical "christian" and school them on their own lack of real truth and knowledge of their own "faith"!
Faith is what you say to your druggy son. "I have faith that you can change," knowing the recidivism rate even if he does, and knowing he probably won't. It's really hope.
Hitch.....what a man.....what an amazing intellect.
The Jesus myth, if handled from the point of view of making money, can be very enriching. Just look at the Vatican and how it has made it's fortune peddling the life of a man who said to not lay up treasures on earth. Priceless!
I am a Catholic and i do agree the vatican hasdone corrupt things with their own self interests that contradict the bible. However you need to understand that we are all born with sin and continue to sin. This does not mean that the religion is corrupt itself. Its the people who do bad things that are the evildoers, not the actual church or religion. We all were born with choices and paths that decide to take. Its up to humans to do the right thing.
how the fuck can a baby be born with sin? it is born without religion, and pretty much everything else. Stop forcing your bullshit onto infants, its child abuse.
Ouch. nice one there, ravez
Well most of them are true. So does the lilith part of being adam 1st wife. Its not in the mass produced bible that every Christian home. I found out about lilith in the big bible in the library, which im amazed myself for reading that big one. 😂😂😂
Joseph and Jesus
1. Joseph was a shepherd (37:2); Jesus is the Great Shepherd (John 10).
2. Joseph was opposed to and exposed evil (37:2); Jesus did the same.
3. Joseph was loved by the his father (37:3-4); Jesus was beloved by the Father.(Mat. 3:17; 17:5; John 10:17; Philippians
2:9)
4. Joseph was hated by his brothers (37:4); Jesus was hated by His brothers (John 1:11; Luke 19:14).
5. Joseph was hated for his words (37:8); Jesus was hated for His words of truth. (John 7:7; 3:32)
6. Joseph was promised a remarkable future (37:7-12); Jesus looked passed the cross to the joy set before Him (Isaiah 9:6,
7; Luke 1:31-33; Hebrews 12:2).
7. Joseph foretold of his future sovereignty (37:7-12); Jesus did the same. (Mat. 26:64)
8. Joseph was envied by his brothers (37:11); Jesus was envied by His. (Mat. 27:17-18)
9. Joseph was sent by his father to his brothers (37:13); Jesus was sent to the ‘lost sheep of Israel,’ by His father (John
4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40; 12:48-50; 17:21)
10. Joseph seeks out his brothers (37:14-17); Jesus sought out His (Luke 19:10)
11. Joseph seeks the welfare of his brothers (37:14); Jesus came not to condemn but that the world might be saved through
Him. (John 3:17)
12. Joseph seeks his brothers until he finds them; Jesus seeks us until He finds us. And this at the initiative of the f(F)ather.
13. Joseph was conspired against (37:18); Jesus was also conspired against. (Mat. 12:14)
14. Joseph’s brothers did not believe his dreams (37:19, 29); Jesus’ brethren did not believe His words. (Mat. 27:39-43;
John 3:18, 36)
15. Joseph was stripped of his coat (37:23); Jesus was stripped of His coat. (Mat. 27:27, 28; John 19:23)
16. Joseph was cast into a pit (37:24); Jesus was thrown into a grave.
17. Joseph was taken out of the pit, alive in his body (37:28); Jesus was bodily-resurrected from the tomb (pit).
18. Joseph’s brothers mingled hypocrisy with their hatred (37:27); the Jews did the same with Jesus (Mat. 27:35, 36; John
18:28, 31)
19. Joseph is sold for the price of a slave(37:38); Jesus was sold for thirty pieces of silver (the price of a slave).
20. Judah suggested the idea of selling his brother (37:26-28); the Greek name for Judah is Judas (Mat. 1:2-3).
21. Joseph’s blood sprinkled coat (goat blood) is presented to his father (37:31); Jesus is our scapegoat and His blood was
presented to the Father as a sin offering. (Leviticus 16:8-10)
Chapter 39
22. Joseph becomes a servant (39:1); Jesus became a servant (Philippians 2:6, 7)
23. Joseph was a prosperous servant (39:2, 3); Jesus was also a prosperous Servant (Isaiah 52:13; 53:10)
24. Joseph’s master was well pleased with him (39:4); the Father was always pleased with what Jesus did (John 8:29).
25. Joseph, the servant, was made a blessing to others (39:5); Jesus was a blessing to the world.
26. Joseph was a goodly person (39:6); Jesus came as a servant into the world and yet lived a goodly (perfect) life.
27. Joseph was sorely tempted and did not sin(39:7-12); Jesus was tempted and did not sin (Mat. 4:1-11; Heb. 2:18; 4:15)
28. Joseph was falsely accused (39:16-18); Jesus was falsely accused (Mat. 16:59, 60).
29. Joseph attempted no defense (39:19); Jesus gave no defense at His trials (Isaiah 53:7).
30. Joseph was cast into prison, though he was innocent(39:20); Jesus is sentenced to death though Pilate found no fault in
Him (John 19:4, 6).
31. Joseph thus suffered at the hands of the Gentiles (first by his brethren then by the Gentiles; Jesus was sold by His
brethren then suffered at the hands of the Romans (Gentiles.
32. Joseph, the innocent one, suffered severely (Psalm 105:17, 18); Jesus suffered by crucifixion.
33. Joseph won the respect of his jailor (39:21); Jesus won the respect of a Roman centurion standing at the cross (Luke
23:47).
Chapter 40
34. Joseph was numbered with transgressors (40:1-3); as it was prophesied about Jesus (Isaiah 53:12) and as it was (Mark
15:28).
35. Joseph was the means of blessing to one, but the pronouncer of judgment on the other (40:16, 17, 19); as Jesus was a
blessing to one of the thieves He was crucified between (Luke 23:43).
36. Joseph evidenced his knowledge of the future and gave credit to God alone (40:8); as Jesus did the same on earth
(John 12:49).
37. Joseph desired to be remembered by the butler (40:14); as Jesus said, “This do in remembrance of Me.” (Luke 22:19)
Chapter 41
38. Joseph was put in prison (the tomb) but God would not allow him to remain there because God’s purpose for Joseph
was not yet fulfilled. So it was with Jesus Christ, God would not allow Him to remain in the tomb (Acts 2:24). Joseph
changed his prison clothes for clothes of glory as did Jesus Christ (John 20:6, 7).
39. Joseph was delivered from prison by the hand of God (God sending a dream to Pharaoh and Joseph’s testimony in
45:7-9); as God raised Jesus from the tomb (Acts 2:32; 10:40).
40. Joseph is seen now as the Revealer of secrets; compare 41:16 with the words of Jesus in John 17:8; 8:28; and 12:49.
Only a fool envies those that live in a fool's paradise. I rather be mad with the truth than sane with lies.
Manhattan Man Melbourne bus
"Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? There is more hope for a fool then of him."
@Jazzkeyboardist1 I don't think your arguments against Mr Hitchins' intellectual ideas are particularly enhanced by resorting to personal gossip about his family, or by the repeated use of a diminutive nickname for him. You may find some sort of malicious satisfaction in this sort of thing, but why not maintain some dignity and just stick to addressing the issues in contention?
@Jazzkeyboardist1 This has nothing to do with the conversation. Personal attacks just show the stupidity of the attacker.
its actually stupid to discuss a dead persons intellect as well to insult them when they cant defend themselves.
Blessed are the cheese makers.
+Michael Green What about the "Big Noses "? Where would we be without Monty P eh ?
+Michael Green Blessed are the big noses.
AND, +Bob Lawblawblaw, evidently a WHOLE LOT nicer than YOU, no?
+Bob Lawblawblaw: yes, I would, only because you told me so -- through your various -- lovely -- replies.
+Bob Lawblawblaw: no, not at all. For, you see: not all can converse intelligently. So, when I come across one such as thee, I simply must let him be his uncouth personality. Thus it is written; thus let it be!
Brilliant. Christopher Hitchens was a true genius whose unceasing efforts to liberate humanity from the stupidity and evil of man-made religion and whose immortal words of wisdom and enlightenment will live on for ever.
immortal words of wisdom that will kill you
It's not about what U believe, It's how U treat U R follow human being. LOVE is the answer.
I miss Hitch.
He was great
Me too
me too.
i quit smoking 2 years ago; and i wish i could go back in time and cure him of his addiction that delivered his fatal illness.
he was a very inspirational and clever man.
+Beorn Borg As Sam Harris says, "Our friend Hitch."
+Chris Hall yeah me three
Calling all religious people... show us proof, otherwise peace out...
Heres your proof. Name one thing that is created from nothing?
***** thats not good enough, come on. U make the claim thats its true, u must show the evidence.
SuttonSantiniPaulo As i was gunna write u before i wrote what i did was: No matter what, no evidence will be good enough when youre busted out. You have no answer because you cant answer it jackass. Its COMMON KNOWLEDGE AND ACTUAL PROOF. Now continue to argue about something you dont believe in and make scenarios about a God if there wasn't one if God existed you confused little boy. lol
***** and around and around we go. U make the claim u need to prove it.
SuttonSantiniPaulo Avoid it little boy. U wont win this.
This man's domination of this subject is what impresses me. The way he brings common sense, reason and knowledge to bear on biblical nonsense, inspires me to know more.
Tim Hallas not impressive at all 😂🤣👊🏻
Well read his books then. Like this speech, I found the book of his I read ('God is not Great') a mixture of strong intellect, persuasive rhetoric and slightly-skewed-to-fit information/facts about religion, ie a fair bit of straw-man creation/destruction in order to make his points. I was almost, but not quite, persuaded into atheism by him and Dawkins at one point.
I wish he was still with us. We need intelligent, fearless free thinkers like him.
Why is it christians are so willing to believe biblical text, god on faith? Is it a form of contagion? That kind of blind faith, lacking evidence, weakens them to skepticism or questioning on other aspect of life, such as history, science, business. When you’re completely invested in religion, with its dogma, as a blind faith subscriber, you’ve been robbed of becoming self-reliant, intellectually resolved, and most importantly, that of becoming advanced human beings-free of religion, its childish superstition and fallacious narrative. “Secularism is the only guarantee of religious freedom.” Thank you very much Christopher.
I feel you are speculating on the false conflict between science and religion.
***** Oho, it is a false conflict, just get your data straight and try quitting your manipulating ways for a while.
The "underlying reason" you care so much abour is pure BS. And does really religion teach believing without evidence? Is it sufficient to say that God does not exist just because Abraham and Moses failed to take a picture of Him?
And where exactly in the Bible does it say that the Sun revolves around the Earth?
***** Geocentrism has no grounds in the Bible, therefore if we regard Galileo's persecution from a more lucid point of view, we could observe that his conflict with the Catholic Church wasn't even carried on religious grounds.
Catholic priests were also scientists and Galileo's heliocentrism attacked their geocentrical theories, and by that their reputations as scholars. It can all be reduced to "the scholar supported by a greater power is the greater scholar". And that's what they did: they used the power of the Holy Office to make sure their competitor is reduced to silence.
Total assholes, of course, but the whole thing, although it might look like a battle on religious grounds, was a mere competition for authority in scholarship using the dirtiest of methods. But that's what you don't recall. Just like you seem to be mute when I ask you about the biblical support for geocentrism.
And the rest is typical radical rationalist bla-bla.
If the verse you quote was used as grounds for geocentrism, it's most surely a misinterpretation or an error of translation. Not a regular error but a very uninspired choice of words that may lead to misinterpretation.
First of all, think about it: did king David, the author of the psalms have any notion of a round (ellipsoidal, geoidal) Earth that would revolve around itself and around anything? No. You must make a link between what the Bible says and the level of knowledge at the time it was written. Because, although it's said to be inspired by God, it was written by humans for the understanding of humans.
Because when I read that verse in my native language (which is so rich in synonims, each with its specific tone of sense that is less susceptible of ambiguity) the word "world" suggests much more than the Earth alone, but the whole Creation, that does not move not because it's imobile in any way, but unwavering. A more inspired translation would have been this: "Surely the world is established so that it cannot be shattered."....or something like that, anything like it that doesn't ambiguously point at immobility.
Because, let's not forget what the Psalms are: poems and hymns dedicated to God. They have a particular place in the Bible since they aren't prophecies or revelations.
About the radicals who deny scientific discoveries: I absolutely disagree with them. But, regarding evolution alone, there is a whole bunch of controversy about it among scientists themselves. Therefore, the other radical orientation, that is to glorify evolutionism as absolute truth, is wrong as well, because it is only a theory so far.
Yes, religion promotes strong faith, but of course, since the vast majority of people are mere simpletons, they make the huge mistake of understanding the verses of the Bible purely literally. Then again, in terms of faith, that wouldn't even matter since God is transcedental. What is a life of 70-80 years believing the world is flat compared to an eternity in Heaven? God's mathematics are esentially different than ours. But I don't expect you would take my word on that.
Anyways, returning to Galilei, you need to know that it is very easy for me to point a finger at the malicious priests, since I am from the Orthodox Church and, hey!, we didn't have any form of Inquisition :P Plus, leaving all sorts of political corectness apart, we still sometimes call it "the catholic heresy". However, relax, we wouldn't burn any at the stake, but rather hope they would see the error of their ways themselves. Otherwise, what's the point?
***** Oh ,yes, there pretty much is. Not in terms of "is it" but in terms of "how". I know the meaning of "scientific theory", maybe better than you think.
I am ashamed to say I find myself avoiding watching Hitchens videos, because it such a tragedy he is gone. If I binge on his videos then I just become sad we will never hear from him again.
Continue binging his videos, with the understanding that he lives on in his impact on the world, and in his impact on you as well. He had a superb mind, it would be a shame for people to avoid his discussions.
Good riddance
You have to give this man a lot of credit, he speaks his mind, and backs it up with facts
Speaks his mind, yes. Backs it up with facts? No
And then some Christian get triggered. Just hold on tight that bible of yours. Everything in the bible is the truth. The earth is 6 to 7 thousands old. God make adam and eve, jesus walk on water, and we all born with mortal sin just for being a mortal.
Chris Wick opinions are NOT facts 😂🤣👊🏻
Facts???? Conjecture and opinion, but not facts!
No facts. Only assumptions and lies. Hitchens is a phony
No one can change the mind of a believer. On the other hand, the mind of those who do not believe can be easily changed. How about God giving a press conference.
Wrong
Quote Stuart Close: For those who believe no proof is necessary, for those who do not believe no proof is possible
JIm Rodgers Quote you:
No one can change the mind of a believer. On the other hand, the mind of those who do not believe can be easily changed. How about God giving a press conference.
Stuart Close Quote:
For those who believe no proof is necessary, for those who do not believe no proof is possible.
If you want to hear God or one of many Gods give a press conference (of Bs)you listen to the Pope or Trump or Putin Duterte etc.
But, if you want to listen to a press conference given by the one true Creative Mistress of all of the Physics (Natural laws) and all things of the ever-evolving Universe, and all of the evolutions of life and being; get up early and go out and find a peaceful place and wait for the Dawn Chorus to begin.
And there are no "words of man" written in any holy or unholy book, that lift your spirit as high or compare.
www.fromthecorcletothesphere.net
I'll wait to see someone do any of the miracles. It's just like UFOs and Aliens. I will believe it when I see it, not when I hear hearsay.
@Chaotic Good Wait, what? You don't believe in aliens as in you don't believe people who've allegedly seen aliens on Earth, or you don't believe that extraterestrial beings exist somewhere in this universe, or in the multiverse?!?
God cannot give a press conference, simply because there is no god.
I choose to be agnostic because every religious dogma, every one is absolutely, positively, most certain that their dogma is the only true way to Heaven., Who's right? It depends solely on where you were raised and who raised you.
+Wendell Goode, I know what you say sounds right; but it's not really true. For example, Paul's teaches in his Epistle to the Romans that those who do not know God through revelation can nonetheless discover Him through the things of creation. Similarly, in the Acts of the Apostles, as he is exploring the pantheon of gods in Athens and comes across a memorial "to the unknown God", he uses that memorial to speak about the God of Revelation. Picking up from that, the Catholic Church -- in contrast to many Protestant denominations -- teaches [read the Second Vatican Council's teaching on non-Christian religions] that non-Christians religions have a participation in the truth. It further teaches that adherents of those religions who strive to abide by their tenets and otherwise live in accordance with their conscience can be saved. BUT: there is one proviso. Their salvation comes through Jesus Christ! Even though they don't realize it!
+joseph thomas i am so sick of fucking dipshits who quote the goddamn bible... LISTEN CLOSELY: WE DON'T FUCKING BELIEVE IN THE FUCKING BIBLE! DONT QUOTE IT BECAUSE WE. DONT. CARE!
sorry. .. just had to get that of my chest.
Hi, Tom: I understand your sentiments and I myself do not at all appreciate facile quotings from Scripture. I'm sure you understand that I am responding to someone choosing to dialog about faith and belief.
+joseph thomas yes of course. .. my apologies. .. i do tire of hearing quotes from a book being passed off as evidence of anything.
+Tom Watson I feel the same way Tom, except the books you all learned from in school have been rewritten many times over to reflect the theories of man and what they believe is the current trending bias truth.
My book hasn't changed (unless you believe the bias people mentioned above) in 2000 years. The message is perfectly clear, even after 2000 years!
How many times did your religion change?
Ricky Gervais "if there is a God, why did he make me an atheist?"
Whyyy did he have to leave us? What a wonderful, brilliant, amazing, irreplaceable man. Spectacular speech, as always with him.
Any damning to hell is Hate speech and bullying.
Please make sure you report any to TH-cam
Just hit the 3 dots next to the message and you can select your choice including hate speech for what it is
Hitch you were a bloody legend. We miss you so much mate.
Talking to the dead??
ATHEISM IS A TEMPORARY CONDITION
IF YOU PLAY IT OUT TO THE END, YOU'LL DISCOVER YOU WERE WRONG
Before we can discuss atheism, we need to define it. According to an official atheism website, atheists define themselves this way: “Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.” Those who identify as atheists prefer to emphasize their lack of belief rather than the refusal to believe. They consider atheism to be intellectually superior to faith in God. However, this definition clashes with the biblical worldview, which states, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1; 53:1). Since atheists can agree with people of faith that every human being has the freedom to choose what he or she thinks or believes, we will define atheism here as the choice to disbelieve in any kind of Supreme Being to which mankind is accountable.
Statistics show that atheism is on the rise in countries that have historically had a strong Christian influence. These statistics include those raised in godless homes, but they also show an alarming increase among those who once held to some form of religious faith. When we hear of a prominent figure in Christianity renouncing the faith he or she used to claim, we are left wondering, “Why?” Why would so many people stop believing in God when His handiwork is everywhere (Psalm 19:1; 97:6; Romans 1:20)? Every culture on earth recognizes some form of deity, so why are so many people claiming they do not believe in any god at all?
There are several reasons people may define themselves as atheists. The first is ignorance. Due to lack of correct information, a person may conclude that nothing exists beyond this universe and man’s experience of it. Since there remains a great deal we do not know, ignorance often invents ideas to fill in the blanks. This often results in either false religions or atheism. Sketchy information about God is often tainted by mythology or religious superstition to the extent that anything supernatural sounds like a fairy tale. Exposed to a mishmash of confusing claims, some people decide there is no truth to any of it and throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Disillusionment is another reason some people become atheists. Due to negative experiences, such as having a prayer go unanswered or seeing hypocritical behavior in others, a person may conclude that God does not exist. This response is often fueled by anger or hurt. These people reason that, if God existed, He would behave in ways they could comprehend or agree with. Since He did not respond the way they wanted Him to, they conclude that He must not exist at all. They may stumble over complicated concepts such as hell, Old Testament genocide, or eternity and conclude the God of the Bible is too confusing to be real. Disillusionment propels people to find comfort in what is seen and known, rather than an invisible deity. To avoid the possibility of more disappointment, they abandon any attempt at faith and find a measure of comfort in deciding that God simply does not exist.
Closely linked to the disillusioned are those who call themselves “atheists” when, in fact, they are anti-God. Atheist is a label some hide behind to mask a deep hatred toward God. Often due to childhood trauma or abuse in the name of religion, these people are consumed by an antipathy toward all things religious. The only way they can retaliate against a God they consider cruel is to deny Him vehemently. Events of the past have left wounds so deep that it is easier to deny the reality of God than admit that they hate Him. True atheists would not include this group in their numbers, as they recognize that to be angry with God is to acknowledge His existence. But many people do, in fact, call themselves atheists while simultaneously expressing outrage toward a God whose existence they deny.
Still others reject the idea of God because they want Him to be easier to find. When well-known atheist Richard Dawkins was asked, “What would you say if you faced God after death?” he responded, “I would say to Him, ‘Why did you take such great pains to conceal yourself?’” Some people frown at the fact that God is Spirit, invisible, and found only through faith (Hebrews 11:6; Jeremiah 29:13). They adopt the attitude that the Creator of the universe owes them evidence of His existence beyond what He has already lavishly given (Psalm 19:1; 102:25; Romans 1:20). Jesus dealt with this mindset when He walked the earth. In Mark 8, Jesus had just fed four thousand people with a sack lunch, but the intellectual elites came to Him demanding that He perform a sign to “prove” He was the Messiah (verse11). Jesus illustrated this hardness of heart in His parable about the rich man in hell who longed to warn his brothers about what awaited them after death (Luke 16:19-31). From heaven, Abraham answered, “If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.”
The most likely explanation for the continuing rise of atheism has not changed since the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:6; Romans 3:23). The very essence of all sin is self-determination. By denying the existence of a Creator, atheists can do whatever they please without concern for future judgment or eternal consequences (Matthew 12:36; Romans 14:12; 1 Peter 4:5; Hebrews 4:13). In the twenty-first century, self-worship has become culturally acceptable. Atheism appeals to a generation raised on evolutionary theory and moral relativism. John 3:19 says, “Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.” If human beings are self-created, self-determined, and self-centered, then there is no moral law or lawgiver to whom they must submit. There are no absolutes and no one to whom they are ultimately accountable. By adopting such a mindset, atheists can focus on seeking pleasure in this life alone.
As long as scientists, professors, and philosophers peddle their atheistic viewpoints as truth and wisdom, people will continue to buy it because the idea of self-determination appeals to our rebellious natures. The attitude is nothing new, but the changing cultural norms are making it more openly acceptable. Romans 1:18-31 details the results of this rejection of God’s authority. Verse 28 says, “God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.” Our world is seeing the results of that depravity. What atheists call “enlightenment,” God calls foolishness. Verses 22-23 say, “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools.” Since the “fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Psalm 111:10; Proverbs 1:7; 9:10), then the denial of the Lord (atheism) is the beginning of foolishness.
I have been an atheist for 30 years and have had many religious folks say they can save me. The only things they prove is they know nothing about the bible and are religious for selfish reasons, like their prayers were answered. I always ask "how about those that pray and never have their prayers answered?" The response is basically that they done care about that because theirs were answered. This is one of the many reasons I am an atheist
He actually did say that if you don't believe his words you'll got to hell...Matt 7
Hitchens' statements need no spinning, no clarifications, no Wednesday night meetings for explanations and context, and most importantly, no faith that one day those that your currently do not understand will all make sense. An incisive and moralistic mind is to be emulated and admired in the exact fashion that religion can not possibly match. Hitchens, you lived well and you continue to inspire.
Riff McClavin and he is a true believer of Jesus right now 😂👎🏻
An alternative explanation is various legends of Jesus (like Paul Bunyan) existed. The gospel writers had to stitch all these conflicting accounts together. There was no historic Jesus.
Note also that Abraham and Moses are as real as Robin Hood and King Arthur, never existed. Even the earliest christians didn't believe in a literal Jesus figure as much as they believed he was a spiritual emissary between heaven and earth. The Romans changed everything when they took it over after defeating their opponents, then wrote the book.
Christopher my dear man!!! Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. You didn't hope for the love of Jesus, you did not see him with your eyes. So when you left this world you were separated from the very reason for all of the answers you thought you knew!
Hitchens gets it right. Christ is the myth. Jesus was a man.
+Ken McNutt II but do you have the primary sources and and contemporaneous historical accounts to support the claim that the jesus character was a man?
+Morgan Hastings Obviously entire books have been written on the subject both ways. My favorite book on the subject is "Did Jesus Exist" by Bart Ehrman. I'm not about to write a book on the subject here, but just consider one point: The Crucifixion is not something that Messianic Jews would invent. Many of the stories of Jesus' life happened, but since they ran counter to what became Christian theology, they had to be highly mythologized. There is no doubt that Pagan elements run throughout the New Testament, but all that really proves is that early Christians were attempting to convert gentiles (especially followers of Pauline theology). I can give you a few more examples if you wish.
Ken McNutt II i think that considering that the historicity of the jesus character is true simply because of employing the use of a crucifixion would be a fallacy of an appeal to ignorance; it's not something that can be disproven. however ehrman has his own reasoning for thinking the historicity is true, just as carrier's peer-reviewed book shows that there is only a 33% chance that the historicity is true.
the idea that possibly therefore probably is quite fallacious.
it's obvious that if the character was a real person it would be very different from the mythologized story. however, if we're getting to the point where the mythologized story is obviously bunk then it doesn't matter if the jesus character was real.
just as obviously there is no santa claus, even if there was a st. nicholas. there is is no santa claus. and there still is no jesus.
until the religious can provide the empirical evidence for their deity it really makes absolutely no difference if there is an higher percentage of historicity than 33%.
that it is only 33% only confirms the absurdity of the whole christian mythology and their desperation to make it real.
+Morgan Hastings I was just giving you one of many examples. The 33% chance you cite sounds like Carrier pulled that number out of his ass. It does matter if Jesus was real only because it provides an example of how real events can evolve into mythology. Jesus was 100% real. Christ was 0% real. Although Carrier's knowledge regarding ancient history is undeniable, his knowledge of the Bible and religion is dwarfed by Ehrman's. Like I said, the evidence isn't just based around one event. The entire story has small grains of truth running throughout it.
Ken McNutt II nope, that actually came from the bayes theorem. another fallacy is over-confidence is fallacious. you have no grounds for 100% historicity. if you did you'd be able to present some primary sources.
House of David?
Isn't that proof all by itself? The messiah was to be fathered by a descendant of David, but Joseph was not jesus father right? If the birth was immaculate, and God was the father, then jesus was not from the house of David.
***** yeah I've seen that, despite the fact that the Bible itself makes it very clear that the lineage of David ended with Joseph.
***** What good does it do to understand it if you go around calling people dumb fucks? WWJD?
Bread Sandwich Oh, we have a DNA sample, now? That's quite an extraordinary claim! Care to share your source?
Bread Sandwich
If you have plenty of other things why do you feel the need to make up shit about the dna of Jesus?
Bread Sandwich
Yeah and then spouted some drivel about dna.
my life goes on without a hitch,
but still feel empty
Your emptiness can be filled by Jesus Christ and nothing else.
Travis Minter Is that a sexual innuendo?
Hitchens has gone back to The Great Gig in the Sky as the cosmic dust that he once was. RIP Hitch
Hitchens was required to study the bible in school as a child and he did his research. I don't think he was a liar. He exposed lies and the bible is not only confusing, its not even a book to look for truth in any way. I'm disgusted that so many people think it's a good book to die for. Jesus was a nut case if he was anyone that existed and more people should get with the modern times.
Hicthens himself is a walking talking bag of manipulative interpretations, inexactities, atheist propaganda and poor, cheap ironies.
Daaoyi Yes the onkly truth is lord jesus super jew!!! All who dont repent will burn forever!!!!! tale me now my lord!!! how i tire of these heathens!!!
Hitch was highly educated, erudite, knowledgeable, articulate. He hated injustice. And atheists do not have propaganda. We don't have an agenda, unlike Christianity. We don't care if you believe or don't believe. We just like to pull your strings a little when you make dumb remarks. If there is a loving God he loved Hitch and welcomed him to heaven.
greatest story ever sold
This is so sublime,so superior!
The take no thought for tomorrow in context means “anxious thought “ and was addressed to his disciples who were being provided for because they are in the faith
I agree. Psychologists and gurus now tell us to avoid thinking about the past or future
a grand master orator, so eloquent and on point. Sadly missed.
we could sure use a few more like him.
There are so good ones coming up. I like: David Fitzgerald, Matt Dillahunty from the Atheist Experience on TH-cam, Richard Carrier and another one whose name I can't remember.
'Have no thoughts for the 'morrow' doesn't sound too different from living in the present moment, and that is being more and more embraced now. I'm on a spiritual path (more Zen Buddhist / Taoist) and it does lead to a very different experience of the world - one where the world, material, circumstances etc. are less important than our response, our growth, our understanding etc. 'Having no thoughts for the 'morrow' doesn't sound maniacal to me, it just seems to me that Jesus was not putting much emphasis on worldly development, and, indeed, beyond meeting our basic survival needs, there isn't much in our material development that is THAT imperative... it's just useful, nice, helpful, convenient, comfortable etc. Whether I live in a world with iPads or without, with internet or without, with ready meals or not, makes no difference to what and where my focus and meaning lies. I think Jesus was the same. If you relate his words to 'oh but how would we build bridges' or 'what about my child's education' then, yeah, it might make little sense, but then that's only because you put import on those things when, really, these are things 8.7 million other species on this planet have survived and thrived without for billions of years, and that we survived and thrived without for billions of years of evolution. It comes down to context, and context is always going to be defined by what we deem as important. Quite simply Jesus - and most devoutly spiritual people - do not lay much emphasis on worldly things... and for good reason. I experience infinitely more happiness and peace and enjoyment of life from sitting in meditation than from playing xBox. I appreciate people like Hitchens hacking at the bullshit, but it would have been great if he had also taken an honest, open minded interest in the substance behind it all.
***** Hmmm. I don't think that you or science are yet in the position to make that statement. I'm not saying that you are right or wrong, just that that is a little too premature given the experiences that some highly developed spiritual individuals experience that i'm not sure brain chemicals are going to explain.
***** This is a discussion about belief in God. This is not what advanced spiritual practitioners experience. How can a brain experience a sense of one-ness with all that is when it is clearly separate from almost the whole of what is? When the Buddha became enlightened he reported seeing the moon and experiencing the moon as himself as much as his arms. How could this be if spiritual / religious experience exists only in the brain? You might claim that he was delusional, but his experiences are not exclusive, and so you either take them seriously or dismiss them. That's your choice. I like people like Sam Harris who recognise that these often repeated experiences dating back thousands of years must surely have some substance behind them... I think that is a fair and rational position. I'm sure you yourself will acknowledge that as far as studies of consciousness go (the highest states of which might be what we regard as 'God') are poorly understood and elementary in terms of scientific study.
***** Meditation might affect the brain, but it doesn't mean the brain is responsible for 'heightened states'... although a heightened state might affect the brain and thus show up on the screenings you are talking about. It would have to be asked why and how our biology has managed to produce a brain that is capable of indescribable states of consciousness and yet for some reason has kept us from accessing it with any kind of ease. When did our brain develop this capacity for experiencing 'nirvana', when did we lose it, why did we lose it, why is their no recorded history of humans living in this state, and so on. I don't think that the brain is a producer of consciousness, but rather a receiver that attracts, decodes and interprets states of consciousness into the physical realm. A bit like a radio, I suppose.
***** It's not really something that can be thoroughly argued. For the foreseeable future it's likely we'll need to await death to discover personally if consciousness survives separately from the brain. Obviously as of now none of us know, and speculating isn't particularly interesting. But returning to the 'state of Nirvana exists in the brain'... Again, if this is so then what could be the evolutionary benefit of such a state of mind given it is one that serves little function in surviving (endless love, compassion, peace, connectivity with all living beings etc. is not exactly a recipe for staying alive in cruel nature), and why is not accessible to us nor ever seems to have been accessible to us (asides from devoted spiritual practitioners)? There is no history of such a state of mind having permeated mankind, unless of course this is the state of heaven discussed in the Bible before man's fall...?
***** Sex being pleasurable has a huge evolutionary function as it gives us a very strong incentive to procreate. If everyone lived in a state of Nirvana then we would of course exist in a utopian paradise, but we are nowhere near that point, and we have to exist in a situation where knuckle heads who want to beat us up and steal our things continue to roam, and so it just isn't plausible that a state of mind that would prefer to be killed than to kill has developed inside of the brain... why would it? And, again, why is it so inaccessible? If it's there and it serves a function then who do we not all experience it? Why is our brain electing to lock up a part of itself that every single human being on this planet would love to experience... a part of the brain that would allow us to reside in endless bliss, peace and joy? I think our brain is able to tune into these higher states much as a radio can tune into different stations, but I don't think these states exist within the brain.
Before Trump. I didn't care about religion. After Trump, I'm at war with religion.
"Don't worry about tomorrow you've got enough problems to get on with today". Those are obviously the words of a complete madman or a wicked man.
Brendan Butler
I think the story of Jesus was directed only to ( the jews of him time) .After the destruction of the second temple, a new religion with a new ethos has to be created
so this " saying" is just a sort of a consolation to the people around him at that particular time.It shouldn't have been embraced as a saying with eternal truth.
So the whole AA and 12 step community who've successfully moved countless individuals from destitution and despair to healthy sobriety are mad when they say "one day at a time"?
When a person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity - When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.
~ Robert M. Pirsig ~ - in other words you can't discuss reality with someone suffering from delusion.
You can discuss religion with the religious in the hope that they will someday see the truth. It sometimes works, eventually.
the religious know the truth,,,Jesus is the truth and the way
I imagine centuries ago groups of people were ordered to create a religion for their society to control their people, which they simply studied previous religions and took bits and pieces from all that predated the current religions of today.
That's your reality sadly. That imagination of yours is your limitation. - Jesus is alive and present. You persacute any chance your twisted dark heart gets compelled and led by your master of puppets satan.
You are being decieved but it feels to good to be bad huh?
Your mind and efforts are not your own. They only serve satan not you. You're a slave to him.
carpejkdiem Ask yourself for a second, how is it impossible that you're not being deceived and that every religion is a deception ......... i'll wait for a logical response without the usage of scriptures from the bible.
Fan Man You play childlike games. Parrot your masters you serve to change the subject. This is not an argument not a debate and not about religion.
Simply the truth. Deal.
carpejkdiem There used to be a God of fire, water, thunder, lightning, wind, and thousands of other Gods. This should be clear beyond belief that God is a man made concept if these Gods were created before these new Gods. Mental slavery at it's best ....... we've been conditioned to believe in God due to not having answers for nature.
Fan Man Sad case of lucifarian m.k.ultra fried prepped for the socialist world takeover of the Old new world order one world religion where your god you will worship or be killed. Make fun like a fool.
God says we all know He's real in our hearts.
You've heard the truth that can set you free. You chose to be powerless to your sinlusts. A slave and a puppet for your god of this world choice.
If not murdered in the process or die naturally. You'll be a slave for the elite at best.
Either way you're a dead man walking now, as it is zombie robotopulous for the agenda for you. You serve a master. Denying Christ with pride is playing the jester.
We all have to open our mind's. Because if Jesus really existed, why isn't there any real proof of his existence. Especially when Rome documented everything, and thousands documented events that happened, yet there is nothing, only what's written in the Bible.
I love the Hitch and all his wonderful destruction of outdated mythology.
This is one of the most insightful comments from Christopher Hitchens.
If that is one of Hitchen's most insightful comments, he needs to go back to the drawing board.
@@bobmarks030344 I've seen this man wipe the floor with the best theocrats could conjure up to go against him only to have them come to a kind understanding at the end and go out for a pint afterwards. This video is far from his best.
Such a brilliant mind, one of the greatest of the past century!
A brilliant mind??? You gotta be shittin me!!
Perversely Misguided in the ways of theology, however
Dustin F. - Thank you so much. Every word in your comment is right on point.
Archaeology has proven that the town Jesus was born in DID NOT EXIST at the time he was supposed to be born. That ground is free of artifacts in that layer. There wasn't even a town there! So, the town lay elsewhere (which still doesn't mean any specific person was born there).
U people r sad af
Dig deeper. If you search diligently for archaeological clues, you will find them. Sometimes, it may at first lay hidden from one's sight, until one looks to a land's history.
According to Wikipedia, Bethlehem-(the town in south Jerusalem where Jesus was born)-suffered great damages due to post war effects. It was founded 1,400 years before the birth of Jesus Christ. This means that it was already an established town, before his birth. Also beware, not every research source may be trustworthy.
I'm with Hitch. I feel that there was an actual person in the 1st century that got the attention of people in some way. However, I believe that the guy was a decent guy. Much more was added and twisted around in the gospels. Tacitus, a pagan and Josephus, a Jew wrote about him early.
You're not with hitch, he's with the spaghetti monster. Science Akbar.
+QueenFanPiper62 gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html
+QueenFanPiper62 about tacitus. i often hear from christians talking about him like he was an eye-witness of some sort. he wasn't. he was born in 55 ad and he wrote his annals in 116 ad. and i always thought of that passage 15/44 as being a later christian interpolation. christian monks are known to have done things like that in their missionary zeal. it's a christian phenomenon. i think it's called "lying for jesus". you know, for the cause..
carryall69 Yes! But, from what I understand I that he wrote sarcastically about Jesus. If several people from different views write about the same guy it seems likely that someone existed. Or that the Jesus thing was more of a 1st century movement in which several characters helped create the remembrance. Kind of like a Paul Bunion legend. I find it unlikely that a religion with that much fervor would just leap off the ground without someone or a profound movement stirred by a messianic wishful thinking in which several figures played a roll. There is a Jewish version that places someone like Jesus living around 100 B.C. The problem is and it is the billion $$$ question why did no one mention this guy around 30 C.E? Perhaps little really happened. If the temple curtain tore in 2 the Romans and possibly the Persians would have recorded it. Funny! My 16 year old son asked me a few years ago as to why it took so long to write the gospels. I told him that one needs to make sure every one is dead before he starts making up shit.
QueenFanPiper62 tacitus describes how nero blamed the fire of rome on "a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace" and then goes on to describe how christus "suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus", how the christians were all arrested and killed and in graphic details. the whole passage sounds like this: the poor christians and evil nero. what makes this whole passage odd, is that it seems to imitate tacitus style but seems to drift away from his focus. he gets too excited, almost like he forgets that he is just an historian when he writes how "Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired". you know, almost as if tacitus was aiming for pulitzer. some argue that only the passage about christus is an interpolation, others go further and argue the whole episode is fake and an attempt to smuggle christians in and to give them martyrs aura. like see, the romans did take notice and we were persecuted by nero in person! the passion of the early christians. died for christ, so romantic. so mel gibsony..
but back to the historicity of jesus.. you know, one possibility is that it all started with paul, babbling about a jewish messiah of whom he had visions of - which was kinda common as a meme for the jews to resonate with - inspiring mark and the others who turned it into a new samson tale or a jewish version of the hercules myth . i wouldn't be surprised if paragon figures start completely fictional and grew real in time. i mean after all, neither paul nor mark, luke, matthew and john are considered to have eyewitnessed him for real. it's all hear say and the only one who had desert visions was paul the epileptic. as a bonus, did you know that epilepsy in old ireland was known as "saint paul disease"?
There are no religious people, even weak believers, in my life. None, at all. It is a happy state of affairs. Obviously, I do not live in America.
That's awesome! Congratulations. I hope to one day move out of the Bible Belt. These people are absolutely crazy.
Dustin F I became obsessed with getting the hell out of Alabama and the South. I was incredibly fortunate to come to Canada when it was much easier to get landed status.
Many of the problems and ugliness of the South grows directly out of the Southern Baptist and other politicized authoritarian churches, such as the Church of God.
Having a church on every block is the hallmark of a nasty backwards place.
You have my sincere sympathy. I hope you can leave sooner than layer.
I love Hitchens. So real
The fascination with religion will soon die as all things have. The evolution of our brains and critical thinking will outgrow this outdated nonsense.
you are right! our world is getting better!
Funny, it hasn't died out in 2000 years.
It hasn't died out in far longer than that, that being said they have got less ridiculous but somehow more cruel.
Religion is a tool, nothing more.
And yet brain scans reveal a religious area of the brain. Usually when evolution spends resources on a thing, it has a purpose....
@Dr Rick, if you are so unobservant as to reduce religion to a tool, then I can't picture how we could communicate on the topic. But then, I note the way Hitchen misquotes CS Lewis in order to 'prove' his point, and I see you are two of a kind. Religious fanaticism is not confined to theism apparently.
John Kricorian (Krico)
No scans show there are effects of religious practices on the brain.
There is no religious are to the brain. These effects are the literal shutting off of certain parts of brain function. In other words, you quite literally use less brainpower when partaking in religious activities. The same can be found in meditation.
Hitchens didn't misquote Lewis either, he paraphrased him.
As for the purpose of religion, rather ironically it's the human brains natural evolutionary capability to percieving purpose and patterns. Religion is the by-product, not the source of such an evolutionary adaptation.
Furthermore if you thinking evolution spends resources then you have absolutely no idea what it is and we will not be able to communicate on the topic.
Actually, as I understand it, Jesus was called "of Nazareth" because that was where he grew up, not where he was born. His family settled in Nazareth rather than Bethlehem because Herod's son had a bad reputation (all of the birth, flight to Egypt, return to Nazareth supposedly fulfills prophecy from the old testament). Hitchens implies "Jesus of Nazareth" meant he was born in Nazareth in order for his argument to make sense.
I'm playing devil's advocate here by the way. My personal belief is that the whole Jesus myth is simply a retell of the story of the Egyptian god Osiris, just in a different historical context with a monotheistic view (got to get rid of those damn pagans). The similarities are just too remarkable to be coincidence IMO.
Zeitgeist is a very interesting movie.
+Padric Lee look at esoteric agenda and kymatica also interesting
The One who get the Name of God are alought to Build him a HOUSE OF GOD IN JERUSALEM.
"The Deadones should burry theey Deadones and the Livingones stay together with the The livingones so that all out of Israel get Salvation. " The LORD JESUS CHRIST, 2006. Words of Life and Peace.
And the God who made HEAVEN and EARTH has given me HIS My Nw Name.
Aiwa- Right and Justice in Heaven and on Earth. Chairs of Justize are STANDING in JERUSALEM. The TOWN of GOD wearing MY Name. The Town of the Chairs of King Davids House. ( Not the Chairs of the Son of God. Not the Chairs of God. )
Where is there a Town of God Jerusalem on Earth?
"NOW i,ve seen it with my own Eys. You should not dring the Cup anymore. I gonna give it too YOUR ENEMIES. At the END Babylon. But Start with Jerusalem.
ONE HOUSE OF GOD ON THE WHOLE EARTH. ONE TEMPLE TOO JERUSALEM. WHO ARE THE ENIMIES OF ZION- JERUSALEM.
Its a false Worship of God to give your life into Dead for Someone else Sins.
The Lord will let free the Capitivity of ZIon. ALL OUT OF ISRAEL.
ALL who stay in the Commands of Zion.
All Nations have too come too Zion too learn the Commands of Zion.
Ten Commands. The Commands of Peace and Freedom. DONT LIE.
Every Sunday a New Word of God. All we will see who has the Word of God and stay alive.
Who ís the Wife of GOD.
The Daughter Jerusalem-.The Daughter Zion.
So, God have too deside ONES and for ever who is HIS Sons.
Born by HIS Maid Maria?
Or Born by One of His Wifes wearing his Name.
All Eyes will see when The Lord return too Zion. I,m in Austria.
Who is the Son of Abraham. The Slave Born one? Or the One Born by the Woman Sarah?
Where is the Temple of God that Jesus Christ gonna build in 3 Days?
This is the Word of GOD.
I Promise you. You shall get your King David.
Why? Where are the Apostel of Jesus Christ too say ONE SENTENCE TO HIS FOLLOWERS, ALL CHRISTS, ALL LAWLESS?
Why he come too Me the MURDERING TOWN Jerusalem?
Remember 2000 Years ago?
Tell the Daughter Zion : YOUR KING COME TOO YOU. After that He was killed, cause he Didnt has SOMEONE STANDING BEHIND HIM. 2000 Years ago and NOW again. since 2006.
Believe what you wanna believe.
You can try it YOURSELF.
3. Buch Mose. The Law too call the God of Israel. The Law Mose always use.
For the Ones who follow the Commands of Zion.
All Blessings are Send too Zion.
Anyway we are at Psalm 2 since 2006.
In None of all Houses of God on the Whole Earth the HOLY SPIRIT HAS NOTHING TOO SAY. One Sentence of the Son of God.
All Nation have too go back into they own Contries and prepare for WAR against Mount Zion.
One Earth-One King -One God-My God.
All Tribes of Israel are Save.
All Tribes of Israel are blessed out of Zion in the Name of the Lord Lord Zebaoth, the God of Israel I,m wearing.
I bounded the Satan 2005/2006 with the Strenght and Power of Zion for 1000 year. I hunt Nebukadfnezar, the King of babel with Peace into Hell. I fight against Hell and I win. Hell is on my Right Side.
All enimies of Zion gonna die. And all killed by the Daughter Zion never get a live again.
But go too the Pope, or the Chefapostel or whatever. God is SURELY SPEAKING TOO THEM.
All men are Born in Zion the Mother of the Nations.
No . All Men are Born By Abraham the Father of the Nations.
The Son of God should Heritage His Fathers Throne King David. ?
No cause ist a False Worship of God too give your Life into Dead for someone else Sin.
Any way where are HIS FOLLOWERS. WHO Can say One Sentence of God?
Nowhere too find.
Revelation: Yes you have proof them all and find out that they are NOT APOSTEL .Mehr anzeigen (131 Zeilen
You are going to need to go FAR BEYOND a zeitgeist understanding lol
Getting a little closer
I'm not a Christen but I have studied it a bit. The Gospels are not historically accurate; Mark, the one closest to the events was written 60 years after Jesus' death. the others a hundred years or more. No one was alive that witnessed any of the actual events and certainly not the Nativity. So where did the story come from? The writers of the Gospels looked to Old Testament prophecies to fill in the blanks and each author added their own spin to it. It didn't occur in December either. Using dates from the Bible it can be worked out that he was most likely born in September or October. December 25th is around the time of the Winter Solstice which was a great festival in the Roman world and most other cultures too, the return of the light, the Sun. He really should have talked to someone that knew something about it. I heard this from a Jesuit priest and others.
I'm waiting to hear the response of the defenders of Bible infallibility on this one too. I'm not sure I've heard a really good defence of the authenticity of the Gospels' content yet.
But surely the Roman Empire's political strategy of grafting ideas from the new official Christian religion on to traditional 'pagan' beliefs and festivals is pretty well understood?
Or, maybe not - at least not by the sort of American Evangelicals who appear to be capable of believing in all sorts of silliness, with tremendous zeal, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, preferring to not question the mainstays of the selective and often fanciful religious teaching they've been conditioned by.
The Gospels are historically accurate, and your dates for authorship are incorrect. Scholars believe the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke to have been written before 70 A.D. The Gospel of John is thought to have been written around 80 A.D (The MacArthur Study Bible). These dates are based on the historical-contextual evidence within the texts. The texts corroborate themselves within themselves as well as with what secular historians know about the time period (who wrote then and now). If you consider that Christ would have been crucified around 33 A.D., this is completely feasible. On top of that, His birth was foretold of in the Old Testament (e.g. Micah 5:2 and Isaiah 7:14). The destruction of the Jewish Temple happened in 70 A.D., and a lot of the events in the Gospels transpired before this point. There are hundreds of prophecies in the Old Testament that Christ fulfilled in the Gospels. But the crux of your argument is, "how can these men talk about the nativity when they weren't there to witness it, and how do we know the nativity is true if the celebration of the event today is not in accordance with the historical date?" A simple answer is that Mary, his mother, could have told them--she was there for the birth and the death. I've known plenty of mothers to share stories of the birth of their children. In fact, the beginning of Matthew begins with a lengthy genealogy proving the lineage of Christ through Mary (His royal qualification as Messiah). She knew her lineage and she knew Matthew.
In the Gospel of Luke, Luke says himself that he compiled the events from witnesses:
"Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to use by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order. (Luke 1:1)"
So, there were witnesses to His birth (the shepherds and Magi) just as there were witnesses to His death and resurrection (the Apostles and the 500). But none of that matters, right? It does matter. The Bible is the Word of the living God. It is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16). Christ was not a zealous rabbi fomenting at the mouth to bring about macro level change in a small parcel of land occupied by a tyrannical Roman government. He is God in the flesh who chose to humiliate Himself by bearing our sins on the cross. He was and is without sin and blameless, but He was killed, and He rose again on the third day. Those that believe in Him and His work and trust Him as Lord and Savior will inherit eternal life. The date of His birth is not important. The exact date is unknown. It's a celebration of what His birth ushered in. He was and is the fulfillment of all there was and is to come. Sixty-six books written over thousands of years all sync and point to His second coming.
Joanna Wagner I think the festival you are referring to is called Saturnalia.
@@kenycharles8600 The stars tell different stories to different people in different cultures in different times. The 12 days of Christmas isn't Biblical. As far as I'm concerned, it's a Christmas carol. One thing is for certain, the stars will fall and Christ will return in power and glory to collect His elect (Mark 13: 24-26). Those who do not accept Him as Lord and Savior and believe in His work on the cross will suffer eternal judgment.
The bible needs to be read from a metaphorical standpoint as well as understanding the Middle Eastern culture at the time.The original text was written in Hebrew and Aramaic and influenced by Middle Eastern philosophy, but it was translated into Latin by people influenced by Western philosophy. This was the first mistake...then religious doctrine was added to it, which caused the true meaning of the stories and accounts to be twisted beyond recognition ever since...
Some people really work hard to discredit something they say doesn’t exist....” Methinks thou protesteth too much”.
As far as I can tell since the beginning of every religion every deity has had a son (sun, get it) that was born from a virgin. EVERY one! All your major Christian holidays fall on pagan sun worship holy days (get it again?) and even their sabbath was changed from the 7th day, Saturday, the day of Saturn or, Satan, to SUNday, the 1st day of the week. Every Christian ritual can be followed down to very ancient pagan worship of the Sun. This is documented and proven and yet they still deny this occurrence. It boggles the mind the power religious dogma has on the uneducated and gullible. I guess that what the clerics count on for control, power and money.
MegzeeR You don't have an ounce of understanding of FACTUAL documented peer reviewed Christian history. You are living in ignorance.
MegzeeR What is even more mind boggling is the power religious dogma has on the educated and astute.
***** "But never again will people be dumb enough to believe any fictional character created our Universe or allow it to be used to control us."
Scientology does a good job of reeling in those dumb people you talk about and the best part for that cult is that their members all got lots of money!
+Nodrog225 Well, in college, we do have people that study harry potter films. I agree with you. Just because there's a study for it, doesn't make it any much more real. Hence why I don't understand why people take theology and expect to get a clearer answer of what they are looking for.
+wyatt1153 Christian history as written by the Church. Yeah, that's something we can all be confident in trusting as documented objective fact. Organized religion could never ever tell lies. There's never been any Christian leader that's ever done anything dishonest or immoral in the whole history of christianity. If there had been we would have had scandals but they've always been upstanding moral men of God with the perfection of Christ.
Fact is, we crawled out of the sea - and it took billions of years to get this far.
'*theory is'...you cannot have it both ways...either you can say you believe wholeheartedly in things which have not been proven or you can't, and as much as I believe in evolution of sorts, (though there is a lot of damning and missing links to the THEORY of evolution) I cannot say 'fact is we crawled out....' as much as I can say I believe 'In the beginning, God created...'. There are too many holes in the theory of evolution to even count. If you want to point something out that the masses believe that has loads of speculation and skewed information then look no further than the Theory of Evolution. I am agnostic and am open to new data and information. I do not believe in hell, which was the main impetus for me to become agnostic though I was raised Christian; I do believe in the continuation of our consciousness', simply because i do not believe that things (or beings) happen for no reason.
Before rebuttal, read a little into how utterly improbable it is for us to go from a fish to a human being in such a short time span geologically speaking and why it seems that the engine of evolution has suddenly stalled when for it to have worked as it had in the past, there should be 'evolution galore' everywhere we look every generation to the next within species today. As I said, I believe there is some merit to the Theory of Evolution, but I do also believe it was driven by a kind of 'Intelligent Design' for which I need not get into rhetoric because certain words so shut down those of the "scientific inclination'.
"utterly improbable it is for us to go from a fish to a human being in such a short time span geologically speaking" - I think before rebuttal you should should go to a museum and gain some perspective of how long millions of years can be. I used to be religious too mate I really was. I prayed almost every night. But then I went to uni and learned how to think critically. Then I began to research for myself and draw my own conclusions. You're agnostic so you are close my friend. Just keep an open mind and gradually try to ween yourself off the religion. Peace.
But I'm not really religious. I'm quite the opposite. I realize that the Earth is around 4 billion years old and that the universe was created around 13.7 billion years ago. I think that secular religion has hijacked the reality of a designer to the universe. I cannot believe that chance and coincidence can lead to our universe out of nothingness and then that life on our planet sprang from innate and inorganic molecules since it has never been able to be created in a laboratory. There are just too many variables to there NOT being life even if you can swallow the theory that the entire universe was somehow able to just 'happen' from an infinitely small 'nothing'. I do not understand why it is easier to believe in that than for a scientist to say 'yeah, maybe since somethingness has never sprung from nothingness in any of my experiments, then maybe someone had to get the whole thing started'. But THAT would be a stretch...it's easier to to believe that other theory...
My point about being agnostic is that I DO believe in a designer. I do believe there is more to existence than this one go around, but I will not say that I CAN know because I do not and cannot because it has not been revealed to me.
Non-belief should not be such a point of pride to an atheist, that just proves my point about them kinda being assholes. Your belief in completely unprovable events and someone else belief in a completely unprovable creator should cancel out any sense of achievement you should have about swaying someone to your 'side'.
your wrong!!
God I miss people like you.
***** How dare he advocate people thinking for themselves.
***** Hitch
***** Asking a question? No, just a remark but now that I have your attention, replies are disabled on the other thread so I'll put this here. Hope you can follow.
“Carrier is not trained in NT scholarship and Murdock is not a scholar at all. But that is beside the point, most NT Scholars and Ancient Historians are of the opinion that Jesus was a real person.”
You are full of yourself aren’t you? Carrier and Murdoch are scholars despite the protestations of internet theists who wish to define the term to include only people who share their biases. And there a many other scholars who agree that Jesus is a mythological figure.
To accept only what Carrier and Murdock say, and to dismiss NT Scholars as not having a valid opinion is to show your bias.
I never said anything of the sort. I realize there is a difference of opinion on this issue, I am not dismissing anyone's opinion (as you are) I am stating which opinion seems most plausible to me based on what I have watched. And you by attacking me for having a bias you have damaged my irony meter. You owe me one.
Why is TheCosmicWarrior banned from this debate?
***** Cosmic Warrior is on a great cosmic journey beyond all of our abilities to comprehend. It certainly was good of him to pop into this chat and call a dead public intellectual an "odious little toad". Thank you oh great traveler. You have contributed much to our knowledge and understanding of this mortal coil.
Christians aren't allowed to gossip or insult people. They have to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. None of them do these things, especially in the United States. Social media is dominated by rude, vile, and hateful comments from these people.
The RNC spent the last 40 years training them to become a reliable voter block who will vote against their own self interests. Trump had nonconstituency of his own so he did a hostile takeover of the RNC who never imagined that a guy with no Christian bona fides could own and operate their voter block.
I sure miss Hitch and I know I'm not alone.
(on an unrelated note I also miss Marty Feldman.)
LOL!! "Walk this way..."
MARTY FELDMAN I MISS. Hitchens not so much
And that is the truth about those Hebrew archaeologists saying the story is crap. I love love love Israel Finkelstein!! He THINKS and he won't just believe.
I love Jesus and I love religion. I don't have to fuck with the traffic on Sunday morning when I go for coffee.
+Maggie Carpenter
In my state you can't buy alcohol on Sunday mornings. A good enough reason as any for me to oppose organized religion.
+Tristan Smith Ah yes I've heard of dry counties. I heard that the distillery of Jack Daniels is in a dry county. I actually heard it's illegal to buy alcohol there any day of the week...
***** They give it away in Lynchburg (Jack Daniels).
Abouy 2600 years ago Siddhartha Gautama said, "Anyone who believes what I have taught without putting it to the test is a fool." All of Gautama Buddha's teachings can be scrutinized and tested in any reality one finds oneself in, except maybe Nirvana without remainder, although quantum mechanics points to the realization it may be none other than hyperspace.
Unfortunately For Hitchens, People find it difficult to agree with him simply because he isn't a likable chap. Same can be said for Dawkins.
John jsmit I like these guys immensely
+Alan Keyes
I also like them; though Dawkins has not the intellect of a Hitchens.
Dawkins also seems closed minded.
Hitchens went through periods of change and readily admitted to them.
Dawkins needs to do what he said he would do and take ayahuasca. However, he demands to only take it under medical approved application. I don't think there is such a thing; and the experience with a fully trained guide is imperative.
Were Hitchens alive today, I suspect he would jump at the chance.
the one remark which leaves me baffled about Jesus as Messiah-whether it was said or not-or misinterpreted through time-as many things suffer this was: ONLY THROUGH ME SHALL YOU ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. ookay...well, what happens to everyone else, if it is asked: hmm..why is that so, seems pretty narcissistic to me and maniacal.
Marti Odalyz Well, if it helps, you could think of if this way:
The Kingdom of Heaven is where all is eternally perfect. That's a state that doesn't exist anywhere in the known universe, as the universe and all it contains had a beginning, ergo: non-eternal. It follows that imperfect humankind cannot reach perfect Heaven by its own merits, as it's a logical impossibility for the imperfect to perfect itself. The Christian claim that Jesus is both fully God and fully Man means that by Christ, humankind can be perfected so as to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
If Jesus Christ wasn't God, then yes, the conclusion that you arrive at would be correct: it would be a truly evil person to promise salvation for a man's eternal soul and not deliver. Thankfully that isn't the case. Jesus' resurrection, which has never successfully been refuted for 2000 yrs despite unrelenting hostile challenges (His crucifixion being the most extreme example), establishes His Divinity and backs up everything He said and did.
John 14:6 Jesus said to him (Thomas), "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
Could you please provide real proof of this supposed resurrection.
elizabeth bunn What sort of "real proof" do you have in mind?
The reason I ask is that very often for those who ask for proof, no proofs that are offered are considered satisfactory by them, regardless of how reasonable the proofs are.
This is because proof of the sort that is 100% undeniable only really exists theoretically, such as in the field of mathematics. In reality, arguments that "prove" a claim at best only do so to the point that it is more reasonable than not that the claim is true. At its highest level this standard of proof is reflected in the justice system for the western world, where "beyond a reasonable doubt" is considered proof.
Yes that verse has been so destructive. John was writing church doctrine. Notice how arrogant JC comes across when in the earlier gospels he wrote in parables?
Marti Odalyz - Your question is so easily answered... however by asking that question and trying to attach any merit to it proves when answered you still would not understand.
The world follows comic books religions.
1 Corinthians 1 V 19
For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
Genius. RIP.
Hitchens obviously did not teach you that much about Atheism, other wise why say RIP? If there is nothing after life then there is no Peace or Rest. There is no up or down, left or right, right or wrong. All there would be, would be, an unending absolute ZERO! You should spend a little time every day contemplating that. If you do not completely agree with this then I suspect that there is still a little bit of Theism left in you.
Anthony Treen Resting in peace is for those still alive. Leave the memory alone. Live in the now.
Rest in peace can mean whatever the reader ascribes to it. It was not my intent to imply "I will see (Hitchens) on the other side." I meant it as "so long friend I was never privileged to meet"...sorry if anyone misunderstood...
Genius? How about spitefully eloquent ignoramus? Yeah, that sounds right.
I wish Sam Harris would get angry and offensive once in a while. I miss Hitch.
***** Only to people who are looking to find offense where it isn't offered.
***** To who? How? I've read most of his books and listened to every episode of his podcast and I've never heard him say anything that should be offensive to anyone reasonable.
+Qwerty Qwertz Not as much as he misses you. He is burning in hell right now. He is no longer an atheist. He would give anything to come back and see you.
What if the the one true God is some random African diety. The Great Jabonku of the Mountain Bambo. Lol. I would laugh myself all the way to hell.
i only recently discovered hitchens' work i hope he is in a peaceful state now in a higher consciousness somehow. i hope he wouldnt be offended by that. i don't think he would though - he struck me as a thoroughly articulate, open-minded man. i am trying to return to that place of peace myself sooner or later having battled and suffered from depression, on and off, for nigh on 15 yrs now. if i'm to be honest, it has stemmed from good old irish catholic guilt. i want to find the strength to overcome it, i've never genuinely felt any benefit from it. buddhism and spirituality of a personal nature have been much more helpful. anyway stay strong if u feel trod upon by unjustified dogmas. this might be the start of a more substantial text from me. until then i will leave you good people in a climate free of my belligerence
Sometimes just for Curiosity sake I take a look At some Of the people That believe So totally In their religion And I have come to the conclusion That teaching my Golden Retriever Trigonometry Would be Much easier Then to try and change their minds .But I do Think That on some level It does give them Comfort In some way. As the human race Continues to evolve, Religion will continue to fade away As science Learns more and mora. It may be in 100 Years Or a thousand years It doesn't really matter. I firmly believe it will happen.... Just a foot note here --I will always remember the day that I became an atheist. I was in the car with my father And I remember him pointing to a Traffic signal pole That was painted yellow And he said Everybody in the world Can believe that Pole is solid Gold But that does not make it Solid Gold. I was just a child of 11 At the time And I found comfort in this because I had been feeling so guilty About Not being able To believe In Jesus Christ, Because it seemed that everyone I knew or came in contact with Did.
Get Some oil On that shift Key.
Shramek's Video & 4K Photography Religion is man’s invention, not God’s. When Jesus came to Earth, man already had one of the most sophisticated religions ever known. He didn’t come to start another one. He came to restore the relationship between God and man.
Pure logic does NOT support the existence of
any gods, angles, devils, heavens, hells, etc.
and what do we make of Socrates' daemon?
@atomic3939 AHAHAHAHAHAHA ...yeah the earth is flat buddy
@atomic3939 You caught me big time!
It is not a matter of logic. IT IS A MATTER OF FAITH
The fear of the Lord is the _end_ of knowledge.
Rein Engel no it's the beginning of knowledge, wisdom and understanding!
There is and was no lord / jesus nor god they do not exist. Nazareth nor bethlehem existed st that time.
+Misstorys
Prove it. Oh that's right, your can't.
They already did mythicist and archeologist. Do some study and find out. No lord Yaweh nor a virgin birth Jesus existed nor did Nazareth or Bethlehem existed ! YOU are the one who has to proof it did for they are your religious claims ... too bad you cannot proof it and never have done. ! dumbo do some study nutcase.
@@georgegilbreath1692 you are Brainwashed
Merry Christmas Mr. Hitchens
miss you Hitchens.
How I miss this beautiful bastard!
he is right.
Hitchens is full of horse shit
One myth becomes a new myth Joseph and Jesus
1. Joseph was a shepherd (37:2); Jesus is the Great Shepherd (John 10).
2. Joseph was opposed to and exposed evil (37:2); Jesus did the same.
3. Joseph was loved by the his father (37:3-4); Jesus was beloved by the Father.(Mat. 3:17; 17:5; John 10:17; Philippians
2:9)
4. Joseph was hated by his brothers (37:4); Jesus was hated by His brothers (John 1:11; Luke 19:14).
5. Joseph was hated for his words (37:8); Jesus was hated for His words of truth. (John 7:7; 3:32)
6. Joseph was promised a remarkable future (37:7-12); Jesus looked passed the cross to the joy set before Him (Isaiah 9:6,
7; Luke 1:31-33; Hebrews 12:2).
7. Joseph foretold of his future sovereignty (37:7-12); Jesus did the same. (Mat. 26:64)
8. Joseph was envied by his brothers (37:11); Jesus was envied by His. (Mat. 27:17-18)
9. Joseph was sent by his father to his brothers (37:13); Jesus was sent to the ‘lost sheep of Israel,’ by His father (John
4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40; 12:48-50; 17:21)
10. Joseph seeks out his brothers (37:14-17); Jesus sought out His (Luke 19:10)
11. Joseph seeks the welfare of his brothers (37:14); Jesus came not to condemn but that the world might be saved through
Him. (John 3:17)
12. Joseph seeks his brothers until he finds them; Jesus seeks us until He finds us. And this at the initiative of the f(F)ather.
13. Joseph was conspired against (37:18); Jesus was also conspired against. (Mat. 12:14)
14. Joseph’s brothers did not believe his dreams (37:19, 29); Jesus’ brethren did not believe His words. (Mat. 27:39-43;
John 3:18, 36)
15. Joseph was stripped of his coat (37:23); Jesus was stripped of His coat. (Mat. 27:27, 28; John 19:23)
16. Joseph was cast into a pit (37:24); Jesus was thrown into a grave.
17. Joseph was taken out of the pit, alive in his body (37:28); Jesus was bodily-resurrected from the tomb (pit).
18. Joseph’s brothers mingled hypocrisy with their hatred (37:27); the Jews did the same with Jesus (Mat. 27:35, 36; John
18:28, 31)
19. Joseph is sold for the price of a slave(37:38); Jesus was sold for thirty pieces of silver (the price of a slave).
20. Judah suggested the idea of selling his brother (37:26-28); the Greek name for Judah is Judas (Mat. 1:2-3).
21. Joseph’s blood sprinkled coat (goat blood) is presented to his father (37:31); Jesus is our scapegoat and His blood was
presented to the Father as a sin offering. (Leviticus 16:8-10)
Chapter 39
22. Joseph becomes a servant (39:1); Jesus became a servant (Philippians 2:6, 7)
23. Joseph was a prosperous servant (39:2, 3); Jesus was also a prosperous Servant (Isaiah 52:13; 53:10)
24. Joseph’s master was well pleased with him (39:4); the Father was always pleased with what Jesus did (John 8:29).
25. Joseph, the servant, was made a blessing to others (39:5); Jesus was a blessing to the world.
26. Joseph was a goodly person (39:6); Jesus came as a servant into the world and yet lived a goodly (perfect) life.
27. Joseph was sorely tempted and did not sin(39:7-12); Jesus was tempted and did not sin (Mat. 4:1-11; Heb. 2:18; 4:15)
28. Joseph was falsely accused (39:16-18); Jesus was falsely accused (Mat. 16:59, 60).
29. Joseph attempted no defense (39:19); Jesus gave no defense at His trials (Isaiah 53:7).
30. Joseph was cast into prison, though he was innocent(39:20); Jesus is sentenced to death though Pilate found no fault in
Him (John 19:4, 6).
31. Joseph thus suffered at the hands of the Gentiles (first by his brethren then by the Gentiles; Jesus was sold by His
brethren then suffered at the hands of the Romans (Gentiles.
32. Joseph, the innocent one, suffered severely (Psalm 105:17, 18); Jesus suffered by crucifixion.
33. Joseph won the respect of his jailor (39:21); Jesus won the respect of a Roman centurion standing at the cross (Luke
23:47).
Chapter 40
34. Joseph was numbered with transgressors (40:1-3); as it was prophesied about Jesus (Isaiah 53:12) and as it was (Mark
15:28).
35. Joseph was the means of blessing to one, but the pronouncer of judgment on the other (40:16, 17, 19); as Jesus was a
blessing to one of the thieves He was crucified between (Luke 23:43).
36. Joseph evidenced his knowledge of the future and gave credit to God alone (40:8); as Jesus did the same on earth
(John 12:49).
37. Joseph desired to be remembered by the butler (40:14); as Jesus said, “This do in remembrance of Me.” (Luke 22:19)
Chapter 41
38. Joseph was put in prison (the tomb) but God would not allow him to remain there because God’s purpose for Joseph
was not yet fulfilled. So it was with Jesus Christ, God would not allow Him to remain in the tomb (Acts 2:24). Joseph
changed his prison clothes for clothes of glory as did Jesus Christ (John 20:6, 7).
39. Joseph was delivered from prison by the hand of God (God sending a dream to Pharaoh and Joseph’s testimony in
45:7-9); as God raised Jesus from the tomb (Acts 2:32; 10:40).
40. Joseph is seen now as the Revealer of secrets; compare 41:16 with the words of Jesus in John 17:8; 8:28; and 12:49.
Tell me more about how Jesus impregnated his own mother and is his own father and how you know it's true because it says so in the book of fairy tales with the talking snake, talking donkey, 900-year-old men, the sun standing still in the sky for a full day, the woman turned into a pillar of salt, the guy living inside a fish for 3 days, and zombies. LOL! 😃
Loving and forgiving Christians spewing bile and hatred, in the name of Christ, all over this comments section. Jesus would have been proud of you all. Amen.
OMG we miss him.
I wish I were dumb enough to believe this god myth - but I have more courage as a result and seem to have no problem being a good person.
santacruzer what is good? What is the standard of good? What is the purpose of being good? Why are you concerned with being good? Why do you need people to know that you’re good? You wish you could believe in God but worried you would be considered dumb? What is the basis for that courage of yours? Is your ego helping you or hindering you?
Being a good person is not enough to enter Heaven
Once you see it all as allegory, it begins to make sense.
Christianity isn't based on facts or history. That's why it's called faith. You have to believe something that can't be proven, and never will be. There is a spiritual side to every human. There's a power that some people don't acknowledge. When groups of people gather in one mind or one accord, something happens. The bible is contradictory and isn't accurate in so many fronts. The 4 gospels don't even agree.
On the contrary, Christianity is founded on historical validities.
@@chrisfitzmaurice7484 Really? Could you show me sources proving a virgin birth? A ressurrection? The creation of bread from nothing?
@@alex-rs6ts The Gospels provide evidence.
Enough for an intelligent person to realize something very unusual was going on back then.
Fitz........ ya a Christian, or a non-Christian doing parody?
@@DavidJohnson-xr2rz You wanted sources, no? Now you don't want sources? Make up your mind.